A THE-: Rs I ;
| ART OF Loerex,fb8
} DELIVERED IN | 7
3 THE PRECGEPTS :7F%
OF. ARISTOTLE
; ANDRAMPS. 1
| WY HEREING <P |
I. The agreement of beth Anthors sts 6 Wo
acclayed. Ko
h 2. The defefts in Ramus, are ſepphed, | 2 ;
f and bus ſuper fluities pared off, by the | &
| Precepts of Ariſtotle, 4 2
| | 3. The precepts of both, are expounded | | -|. _
| and applyed to w/e, by the afſiftaxce | $$
| of the beſt Schoolemen, =
<27 a= oP.
| By Tuo: SpnNncCDBR an i pr
| * LONDON 'Þ :1;8
| Printed by Johz D.w/oz for Nj-| . 4
cholar Bowrne,ac the South entrance | [8
__ ofthe Repall Exchange. 1638. 8 T2, S.
—
.
— Cm
—_
& we
gin OO o _
ls vn Mr
| Wh
|
—
_
LNG Eader;, The publiſhing of
this Treatiſe, ſubmits ir
trothy judgment, It may
be thou wilt judge ir of
little worth, becauſe thou eſteemeſt
I, the Authors credit to be ſmall,
2.the Art itſelfe ro be obſcure, and
2.0t little vſe,and 4. rhe worke to be
imperte&, and 5. vnfitly put forth
inthe Engliſh tongue, Bur this Pre-
face ſhall make it cleare, thou art
miſtaken in all theſe particulars.
1.Though my own credirbeſmall:
yet this needenot hinder thy good
liking, becauſe my labour is butto
©: colletout of other Authors. So thar
it thecredit of Authors will pleaſe
thee. I need not feare thy diſplea-
|
|
J
ſure, for here thou haſt Authors of
all ages, and of the belt account, yea
Ariſtotle himſelfe,the Prince of Phi-|
loſaphers ( as the learned vſe to call
A 2 ' him)
—_
—
WP £.
— 4
node wel.
TS Tul PV" =
MO —_—
i ao Ys 1 4%” 46>
To the Reader.
m)leads thee the way, and guides
rhe whole game,
2. Some account the art itſelfe of |
Logicke to be obſcure, and therefore
hardto be attained : but though this
were true, yet is it worthy of all that |
honour that is due to any humane
arrwhatſoever, becauſe the dificul-
tieariſcthnotfrom thething it ſelfe:
(for itagrces to humanercaſon, be-
ng no more but a comprehenſion
of precepts,direCting the vie of true
reaſon) butfrom mans defe&,as be.
ingeither vnable for want of natural
pats, or vnwilling through idlenes |
ro learne it, Bur grantthis Art were
in it ſelfe obſcure, yer is it no leſle
honourable for thar, becauſe ſilver,
gold and other pretious mertals are
hard ro obraine : yet are they high-
ly eſteemedof/ as daily experience
ſhews)for what labour will not men
take, and what hazard will they not
vndergoe to getand holdthem?Nay
—_—
— —
— — —
| I adde
hm A—_
— —C
_-
|table;andrthis is the caſe with the
' | precepts of Logicke, becauſe hereb
| To the Reader,
I adde further, that the difficultie of }
attaining vnto this Art, makes Ir,
more honourable when it is attat-
ned ; for things hardly gotten arc
rare, and rare things are pretious,
eſpecially when thcy are of excellent
vie: andſuchis this Art of Legreke,
| a5 my anſwer to the next will ſhew.
3. Many are of opinion, that Zo-
zicke is vriprofitabic, & of lirtle vſe,
| as ſerving to exerciſe the witts of
yong Schollers, and that therefore
when they grow vnto yeares, they
doe wholly negle& ir, This judge- ;
| ment is erronious ; for whatſoever |
tends to ſome good, is truely profi-
( in ſome ſort) is healed the wound
; WC receivedin our reaſon by Adams
| fall: and this daily tryall reacheth, !
| becauſe by rhe precepts of Logtcke,
| 6 2
things hidden and darke are cleare-
2
ly objected ro our judgement, Truth '
> anc '
-
— — —— — — — OO — — _ _ NT WT _—_—GVCCLCCTTT — _— -
—
——
4
!
To the Reader.
land falſhoo1is made to ſtand naked
before our knowledge.
It may be ſome will conceiue that
maas naturall LZogicke will ſerue ſuf-
ficiently for the toreſaid ends, and
that therefore there is no neede of
precepts.
I anſwer. True it is, many mans
naturall parts are - i and prompt,
ſoas they are ſpeedy and ſound in
judging. Bur this is not every mans
caſe, therfore vnto ſuch the precepts
of Art are needfull, Yea, I ſay , thar
ſuch precepts are needtull to the
prompteſt witts, for man hath not
now ſo ample vic ofreaſon as Adan
had art his firſt Creation, and rhere-
fore he needs the helpe oi artificiall
precepts.
To conclude, fince the Art of Lo-
greke 1s no more bur a DireQour of
true Reaſon:the more logicalla man
is, the more is he likea man ,and the
leſſe_lozicall, the leſſe like a man |
who
_ A» _ —
%
——
———
_
To the Reader.
who is a reaſonable Creature. lt this
be true ( as it1s moſt true) then muſt
it be granted that the precepts of
this Art,are profitable tor the vic of
man 1a the higheſt degree.
4. This worke is not imperteq,
becauſeno precepr, efſentiall vnro
Logick:, is wanting. I haucindeed o-
mitted the modality and converſion
of propoſitions and Elenchs : but
this breeds no defe&t in the art, for
theſe three apperta:ne to the expo-
ſition of the precepts of this Art:
they are no cſſenciall precepts ther-
of, 1, The modalitie of propeſirions
doth explicate the ſubje& or predi-
cate of the propoſition wherein it is.
2, The Converſion of a propoſition
isno more, butthe right placing of
things not rightly placed in apro-
poſition, And 3, Elenchs are the
detections of falſhood in the forme
of ſyllogiſmes. |
5, Our Mother Tongue doth nor
diſgrace
NF WY
To the Reader,
!
gracefall ro
thing,
x6 238,
| Louwghn the 24.0f Tue.
cre? Beſides, ſome
men vaderltainotLatin,& yethauc
| they neede of Lozicke, becauſe they
need che helps
Thus (1 hope ) full ſatisfaQtion is |
geen to every doubt that might
inder thy profit by this art now of-
fred vnto thee: ſo as nothing more
ſceimes needfull, or worthy thy la-
bour and mine: therefore here I wil!
_ all thac I haue to ſay for this
to the vie of rea{on,
Tx 0:
4
diſgrace this Art of Logicke to the:
| Exzlih,no more then Greeke did to *
the Grec/ans, or the Latzye to the Ro-
m1 : tor it it had, then would not
Ariſtotle haue written his Legicke
in Greeke, nor Tu/ly his in Latine.
We haue the holy Scriptures in our
mother tongue, without diſgrace |
thervnto, wny then ſhould irbe dil-
THE ART
OF LOGICK
Cuap. I.
The Definition of Logick.,
DGICK u an
Q Art of asſc 8 [61 [4
e .. well, |
Sl In this ſence, it ts
This ſentence de-
|
' fineth, or ſetter our the whole na-
wre of Logitk, Ariftotle hath che fame
Glance. Top: lib. 1. (ap. Ve 24 Jn
| thelc words ; |
DidteRick wy Congreſſez
Excercitation,
p M wo CP hulo oſophtcall ſcrence.
Ramus confi in his Schooles
| B ypon:
called DialeRiick,
KR amns,
T,
A
——
— - — —- — — —
The Art of Logicke, |
vpon this place alledged;that,thisſen-
tence comprehendeth ( well neere )
all the notable things of Logick: and |
cherefore, ( in his Iudgement, ) i is |
a definition of it, The thing it ſelfe |
doth ſay noletTe: for,the three words ;
attributed by him to Logick or Dia- |
leRick, doe lignifie, diſcourling well. |
Ram makes diſcourling the end of |
| Logick : Ariftotle doth the fame, by |
theword profitable, for, as we learne |
by Thom: 1* ,2z. Fe 7» art. 2.,c0r,
q+ 8. art. 3, Sed.con, Every good, or-
dained to ſome end, ts ſayd to be profitas |
ble: That which tendeth to ſome end 1s
called profitable, |
Natwrall.
Logick 1s ;
Artificiall. |
Naturall Lopich. is cither the vx. !.
derſtanding it [elte, in that reſpeBl,thas |
of i'ts proper, and ſpecificall differente,
it bath a power of diſcour/ing z or ra-
thergthe certaine knowledge of the man-
ner, or wayes of diſcomr (ing, which the'|
reaſon it ſelfe,bringeth forth, without
the helpe of any ordey, or metbod, Thus '
farre |
,
1
| The Art of Logicke.
farre the leſwites (incher prefice be- |
fore the Organon Colleg: Conimbr:q. |
6.art.2,col 62. Logich 1shere taken |
for artificiall,not nattfrall: ſo the {ame |
leſmites cell vs1n that preface! cod: 67. |
Ariſtotle implyes this diftin&tion; 1n |
b the firſt chapter, and firſt bocke of
his Rhuoricke © A tas (faych he: )s
Lopgictan by nature, 07 art.
Ir [ Log axe Dio cheſenainies |
are vſed indifferently, to ſet out the
thing defined: and, we haue the fre-
-quent vie of Jeatricy meri to avow it:
\ The leſaites doe expreſly teach it,
(inchcir Commentary vpon Arrfotes |
| Organon, Col: 26. neere tothe end, m
| pore words, The whole art of diſcoyr-
(oat & ſet out, by, either the word Lo-
the word DialeRick, Atid,
Low inch not barely avouch ic; bur,
they confirme it with plete of
tes, as the Reader may finde, it |
%" ay to conſult the plies afled.-
Both the words doc ſighifie 10
; more, but,a thing appertaining vnto
| | the vſe of reaſon ; therefore, the /e/i4- |
B 2 $t28-)
CC —— a Ys —_ _
— Al... A. POIrY
ns
þ *. "1 94
on ” CR
g bo = P _ *
I” "= F216 A > ,
"» ** - - OE F XY
yu £2 EY '
LY CL. > 5. _—
he OE & , # -
I X s Le. _. Pts
_—
-
PI
=
© %«
« Mz, ">.
7 * £-pt#
* ated 4 - $
07 » b 1} 3
wa 7 —
The Art of Looicke,
m_—
"—
es in the ſame Pretace, g, 4. «rt. 4+
Col: 40. doe conceiue, that, Logick
( i an univerſal apprehenſion) 15 no
more,but,a direftar of the art of reaſon.
And, Swarez, hath the fame thing,
in his Metephyſicks at(p.3g.D.
{s:] This word, ische band, cotye
both parts of the d:finition together.
By it, the later part is athrfned of che
tormer, and, it {ignifics an cilcnuall!
attribution ( rhat 15 ) that, the latrer
part of the definiuon doth giue being
vnto the former ; ſo as, the firſt doth
conliſt 1n the ſecond.
[ A# art: ] The word rt, doth
(crout the generall nature of Legick: |
(chat1s) ic doch ſignifie, chat nature
whuch Logick hach-in common wath
| divers other chungs: as, Grammar,and
| Rhetorick &Cc. Its called an art,in the
moſt common vſe of men;z\ometime
it 15 called al(o aſcience, and, that we
find in the /e/wites Pretace 9.4. art.3.
| £r1ſtozle doth vie both the wordsin-
ditterently , as fignitying the fame
thing, in his reface ro the Muaphy-
[icks and firſt (hbapter,
The
pH The Art of Logicke,
Theword are fi grutics,amaltuue!
of Precepts, orderly argeſted and appro-
ved by v/e. And,thusthe Jeſwres teach,
in their Pretacc, q, 6. art, 2. 8rd Arr!
forte hach the fame thing un his Pre- |
face ro the Metaphyſicks ara firſt ( hap-
ter, Where, wee haue thele words |
e-2rt is gotten by experience,experience
makes art. Art is mage, when as one
vnver/all thing, 1s framed out of nuany
experimentalls : lo as, 16 doe by expert
ence,differs nothing from art, He brings
the ſame thing, and the realon of it,
Poſter lib 2.cap. 19.
The word [ An] is vſed to ſhew,
that Logick 15 one untire art, that can-
| not be divided, nor i5ſubordinare to
any ocher art, as Geometry, and many
otherarts be, Logick is uſually called
che art of arts,the miſtris and diretor
of all other: and, chere 15 good caulſc
| why, tor, Logick as/puteth of all things
| and 1s common vnto every being, as Af
7:ftotle hath taught vs in the fourch
| booke of his Metaphyſicks,cape2 MEL 4+
Experience ſheweth , that, Ariſtotle
—_
ſayd true, for, there 15 no art, but by]
| B 3 thc |
—
—
. he. + 9a. + Ai * PA "I
_— a ORB So, HY: '« ”% - of
= I IR n
<A SF 4
wes 695 1 f®
The” Art of Logicke. |
SJ
——————
|
| order, and the parts of cach (ingular
| ſhall ſee hereafter,
ihe ue of Logick, all the precepts |
thereot are framed together, ina due
precept, arc {o fitted together, that
we may inde truth from talſhood, |
| Of diſcoxrſmg ] Theſe words, doe
aſligne the ſpecall nature of Logick,
the very firſt, and incinſecal} being
thereof, and containe the forme,' and
the end: (1 ſay ) they comtane them
both, bcecauſethe forme 15 the toun-
taineof the end, and the end 15 the
continuation of the forme z 25 wee
Iext,
The end of Logick,1 a
The remote end of Logich, is the ve- |
ry alt it ſelfs of diſcomrfing : but, wee
ſpeake not of this end of Logick in the
preſent definition. The next end of Lo«
gicky us to preſcribe a way, and rules of
diſcour/ing ; ( 4s the end of Logick, ts a
framing of the meanes of diſcour [ing 3
lo ſay the /eſuites in their Path
vpou Ariſtotles Organow, and the Pres
face |
_ Ws I oe es
— —___
__—_———
The Art of Logitke,
_
| face thereto, Col. 27. 55. So, like- |
wile faith Gi/lins, 1b. 8. Tra, 1. cap.6.
#®.4. The art of Logick delryereth |
Wajes, and rules of aiſcourfing.
[ To aſcaurſe | (Asit is hereuſed)
IS tO declare one thing that is leſſe
kwowne, by awother thing that 45 more
| krowne, T his we haue inthe /eſwites
Preface col. 27.and 62, As for cxam-
ple, He that knowes not what a man
15,15 made to know it by ſaying a man
15a rea{onable Creature:the addition
of rationalitic vato man, ſhewes what
man 1s. So likewiſe, when wee (ay,
God 1s a ſpirit, infinite in all perte&ti-
on;zwe intorme him that 1s ignorant,
and knowes not what God as. In this
very thing, this art of Logich, doth
difter from all other arts whatſocver :
tor Logick ends in ſpeculation, and ,
proceedcth no further than to judge |
whether one thing be truly pA |
of another: all other arts, be prafti- |
call ; chey concerne mans gutward |
| or tran(ievc ations, as their next end: |
a5, Granwner, and Rbetoricke tendeth |
VNtO mans (perch, Geemetry vnto|
B 4 Mmeca-,
4
F\ EY
m— — Rm ” _— —
T:.e Art of Logicke.
meaſuring, Aruhmerick vnto mums
benng,&c. T hat art ( fauh Okam) &
pratticall, which dwetieth ys y40 rhe
acing of a thing to be wronght,{n zeaiſt,
9. 11.4, V. Yea, inthis,mans know-
Icdge differs from the knowledge
thatis in God andthe Angels: mn that
they behold the chings in themſclues, |
asthey arcinthem{clues,diftin each
from other: they doe not know one |
thing let1cknowne, by che light and |
refic@ion of another thing,that 1s bet-
ter knowne: whercfore their know-
Teage, 1s called intclleQtion, ours 1s
called rationalitie, |
9, | [ Fell] T his word, ſeemes ( vnto
ſome) ro be ſuperfluous;and, a man |
| would thinke, that the [eſsires were |
of chat opimion, becauſe they define |
Logick, ts be no more, but an art of
ds/conr/img, coll, 27. ſo Gulims, lib. 1,
Tra, 1. cap. 6. n9.4, yet, indeed, 1n 0-
— Cu Ct CAO A OS Io IO Ae TY —
—_— —
ther places, they haue as much as
this word comes to : for, thus they
writen their Preface the left queſtion,
col. 70. He is @ good Logician, which
auth oxerciſe himſelfe im cach thing
we 4 5
9 *
E: The Axt of Logicke.
well, and diby ancly's and;Sueresdoth
| joyne with ; xg mn his HMeraphyſicks |
| | dip. 39.7), Logick(laul n hc) «x «#2 art, : |
axrelisng the operution of the wnaer- |
| Pardng, to exercile at (cl/e art; fu 14-19, ;
| ard acerding to reaſon, And, all chle |
| Auchors dee adde,thar word to very |
' good purpoſe ; tor, thczeby Lopick 1s :
diftinguiliicd from .$: phiſtry, which |
| 15 onely a deceiving ſcience : A So-
' phiſter [eemrs to Krow, Hut inuecde,
| Knowes not, im the truth of the. thing,
a> welearne from Ar:/totle,in his Me-
taphyſicks, lib. 4. cap, 2. text. 4. And
| thus much ſhall ſuthce, for che open-
ng of the ſeverall parts of he defint |
tion of Logick. |
That wee may put a finall end, to '
| the martcr in hand, wee mult remem-
| ber, tharthe word as conrling, umply- |
| eth arguments, wherctore wee mult | |
' Now fee what an arguimcnt 1s, |
An ar 0911 1s that, which hath Y
force to argue. |
Aluſfiatorenſs 5: \auh jn his Proface, |
lt, F,an argument, ts a rea/ony that Ll
verb. vs knowledge of a thing that i; |
doubt» |
WW a$-
10,
Ran.
II,
Ub _ _— OO” — ——_—
The Art of Logicke,
— ———— <> —— — > ne > non ——_—
IT,
| 1 ) che ching which 1s common to
11ng,obictedto our vnderſtanding,
dowbtfull: eAriſtotle ſaith, that, argu-
ments are ſuch, as whereby fauth ( Lo |
gically ) may be made, of the thing that
ſpoken of, Poſter, 66,1, Cap. 22.
Logice $7 Ur CFC.
[ That ] This word importcth, the
enerall nature of an argument ( that
arguments of every kinde: 2nd lig-
nifieth a notion, which our vnder-
ſtanding dochapprehend,areſultancy
or retie&ion, proceeding trom a be-
[ Which hath a force to argue ) T at
15,hath of its nature a power,aptitude,
OT D—_y_— —-——__ - ————_ _—
or farnes, to bring the thing, ob1eted.
| unto our underſtanding, into che
knowledge, and inuinon thereof,
I omit co giue inſtance of theſe
things, becauſe, that will better be.
done in ſetting outth- nature of par- |
ticular Arguments: Wheretore,now, |
wee hauc tully done, with the farlt
precept of Loguck ; I will proceedeto |
the ſecond.
|
CHAP. |
— _ —
” —-
——_—_
The Art of Lovicke.
—_ _ —— — —— — ——__—__— —_——
ua 14
The Diſtribution of Logick.
Octck hath ) guments,
two parts, the YDpoſing of ar-
Wment 5.
This precept muſt haue the ſecond |
place: tor, the nature of the things |
themſclues doth require it : becauic|
by this, we come to know, what par-
| ticulars are wrapped vp inthe former
precept, and, Arsſtorle in the 6. Booke
of has Topicks, and latter end of the fu ſt
Chapter, requires, that, the thing de- |
fined, be diſtributed into parts: Ram |
rooke this precept out of the ſecond |
| Chapter of Ariſtotles (ategories,
where wee haue thele words: Thoſe
things, which are coxtained in Logick, |
FS 1 witbout complexion,
with complexion, |
|
I ſayd, Kamres followed Ariſte-
| cle inthis partition, and, the thing it.
lclte ſhewes ic z tor, they both di-|
| vide
— ——— —
— ——
Finding out of ar- | Rams,
I
—_ DA. —_— Rs. A. oe
NR —_——
The Art of Legicke.
— O———— ——— —_—— —— —
vide Logich, into two parts 3 The
firſt part 1n Z«gick ( according to
Ariſtotle Jare things without complext-
on: (o arethey, acording to Rams, as
his owne words doe winetle, when
| he rermes them, Sexcrall reſpefls of
| things, conſidered alone, and by thews-
ſelues. Ariſtotle giues, his incomplex-
edtbings no name: but, thereby he
| MEANes arguments, 45 they are vadil-
| poſed, as,hisn« xt precept doth ſhew,
| and, Ramns g1ucs chem that name CX-
prelly.
Ramys callsthefirit part of Lopick
{ invention : and, lo doth Ariftortetoo,
| as wee may gather from che 52. chap®
' ter, of the fir (7 booke of ts Preorems :
\ Where, a litcie after the beginumg,
he requurecs, a fagultie of mnurnting, in
him ,that makes a Sy/logr/mcbutymore
plainly, and tully: we find- the lame
thing, in the firſt / bapter of the eight
booke of bes T opteKs ; To fiaae out
{lah he) the plate, from whence a
mas m4) argue, appertames to Logith;
therefore, vnro the firlt part ot Le-
| eeck, tor it can haue no other place,
Ramus
———
—
"Yo
—
—— — OO_— CC ————— A
The Art of Lopieke,
Ramme calls, the ſecond part of- Lo- |
gick,ds/poſutton. So doth Ariſtotle allo,
in the place lait allcadged, where hc |
| Fcquires of aZ,og1cian, to drpoſe {ingu-|
| lar thiagi,by themſclues : andghe faicn, |
[
[
'
$
'
4
[
|
|
that, the dupoſition 25 proper 194 Logi- |
cruz and, theretore, belongs to Lo: |
! &
|
|
|
umm.
| part thercot: toric cannot beche frit: |
yea, that Arifforle mcant thus, doth |
vndoubredly appeare; becaulic, lic |
appoints Is Logics, firit, to finde |
out the places, from whence tc argue;
and then, in the ſecond place, to dil- |
pole them, being lo found out. |
[Twopearts | Thats, the precepts
Of Loguck, tcnd vnto two things, nd
ends : and, they be called parts, be- |
cauſe, all thole precepts be [hared, or
parted betwecne thoſe two eongs: |
ome ot them appertaite to the one, |
and the reſt vnto the ocher. |
[ Fradirs ont ) To findc out, fome- |
umeligrifcs, rodiſcover athurg that
1s ſecrer; bur, here it-15 not lo taken, |
bur, the zneaning is,that,the Precepes
of Logick, doe alligne the ſeates, and |
— -
_—_—__mm_—_—_—— OO ———— — GC —
places
—'”— <<” — a —
- -# Ich. co ro ot w ewe We «a
OUMETIO OPER ROO OOO R— - —_—_—
- .
-
=
- - 4
—-
_
.
- —_ a a
»%
ws
PT
_—
te eee
L- 14 The Art of Logicke,
| places of arguments, and deſcribe,
| and ſet forth the nature of them: and
| fo much forche gencrall Diſtribution |
of Logick,
EESESTSESES)?:LESES}
CuaSs Iiil.
Of the ſeates of Arguments |
"> in generall,
_— ! |. Ye aſſigneth ten places, or
i ſcates of arguments, the fourth | |
-/ "i Chapter of his (\ategories : un thee |
-;, |] words;
6g.r, of gick, without all coniunttion, doe fe \..
»-4 viſe: |
|
1 Swbſtance; 4s, a man, a beaſt,e*e,
; 2 Omantutie ; as, two or three cubits, .
c 3 OPnaluvr; as, white, Cc. Y
| t 4 Relation ; as, double, halfe, &c. . |
5 Where; as, m the field, &c. |
6 When;as,zeſterday,the yeere paſt, |
| 7 Theplace; as, be ſitteth, rc. ©
ES | ' $ To mo) ; as, tobe armed, Oc.
[9 Toave ; as, bo cut, Ofc.
-
o Ti
Eye o . FN 2 0
et : ”— ”
The Art of Logicke.
—— — —
| 10 Te ſuffer ;z45, to be cat, EF
He repeares the fame doctrine inthe |
' ninth Chapter of bus firſt booke of the
Topicks ; and in both places, he doth |
| explicatethem by certane properuies,
. that be common to them all 1oyntly ;
vi2, 1. They weuther affirme, nor deny.
| 2. They be neuther fal[e, nor true. 3. A
' coninnition being added tothem, they
Fontaine negation,or affurmarion,trutb,
or falfaod. 4. All propoſitions are fre-
med from thens. |
Inthe fift Chapter of his Categories,
and in his Prior. 4ib, 1, cap.2.7. Eorum
zgituy, Poſt. lib3x.cap.2'2. he doth di-
videthem chus,
Ether, ſubiefied oxely,
| Theſe ten, bed Predicated onely.
Or,ſubiefted, and pre-
adicated, dl/o.
| Thus diſtribution, is ficly ſer out by
' Akriſoodeve, m hisPreface A, andB.
| Where, hehath theſe words:
| An Argument, \proveth :
| «s that, which } or s proved.
W : This
|
—
|
|
|
— ll 4
—_— as | I_
_ ee ht CA
pets fe PPS
The Art of L 77tcke,
————— — —
This is all, chat finde, touching ar-
| guiNents 1h generall,
| Aritole delivers the doftrine of
' Subſtance ( which isthe firit (eat of ar-
uments)n the fitt Chapter alledged,
which containcth theſe toure tlungs;
I. A ſubſtanceyts every thing,of which
we 294) /ay, that, it ts.
We findethe ſameching'in Themes,
thatſocver ((aith he) # efſentiallto a
thing , appertaineth wnto ſubſtance,
I1.P.4+77-@1, I-ad 1,
_— — — ———
—
Firlt:a@ every /ingular
2.Subſtaxce is8.. & mndruidualt thing. |
Second: 4s Genms and |
| ſpecres. |
3. Genus,and ſpecies, ( lr ontf;e ſubſtances,
by a fizera'tne /peech, wot proper ty, |
they ſrqmbie, rather, the manner, ac- |
coraing io which, @ thi? ts,
4- 4 (:gular thing, ts of properly, 4
|
a
ſubſtance z beravsle, al: orber rhangss |
be attributed thereunto, and that, J
attributed yto nones
So)
The Art of Logicke,
finde in Arfotle, touchung, the, na-
ture of thoſe arguments, whuch are
contained in the firit place, or'{eat of
arguments : (tor chisume weanult o-
mit the conlideration, of che, ſecond
ſubttance;for, that hach chelaſkphace
in this firſt partof Zogick);,Fhe-brſt
ſubſtance comes now tw be,kandld:
Thomas doth wholly ſubicnuhe-vnto
Arsftotle, for this diftinctigng ang cx-
plication of ſubſtanc,reported ou of
Ariſtotle, and,-he ſhewes. the ſarhe,
| in this ſhort ſentence : viz in che newe
of firſt /'mpſt ance, 1s intended the nature
of wnzver/all end parts. 1. p.9. 19art-
3.44 2®, And,torturther explicayon,
he faith, 1. p. 4 75. att- 2+ 442”,
| A firſt, or marnduall ſubſtance nay be
|. taken two wayes; one way, for tvery
thmg that bath a ſubſtance | another
Wa), for 4 compleat /nbſiſtent1, m the
nature of any 'pecies 3 from whence, «
maxs hand may be:called a firlt ſub-
ſtance, or an individual! thing after the |
firſt ſort : but not after the ſecond: (0
|
allo, a mans ſoule, may be calleda fir
. I7
_— ———
' Thus, haue Iſetdowne, all that I
oy
= C ſub-
__.
GT 7 ON Wl:
— —— — —
The Art of Logicke,
Jubftarce, or a ſingular thing in the fo f
ſort: becauſe it is ( 45 ut were) athing,
I l :
| that [ubſifteth : but, that which i coms-
pownded of ſoule, and bodie, us called,
| « firft (mbſtance,or an indioiduall being,
| in the ſecond /exce,
Vmo this place, muſt be referred,
every individual efteR;as ic conſiſterh
by force of all the caulcs, and, every
individuall ſubieR, that receiveth a-
ny outward change, whether it be by
the fubſtrating of ſomethung inioy-
ed, or the receiving of ſomething
that 15 added,
The nature of thele effefts, and
fubie&ts, 15 delivered by Ariſtotde, 10
his cench place, or feat of arguments,
VIZ. of [uffering. 1 ſay, they are con-
caimedthere ; for, in the judgemer
of Thomas. 1. p.q. 79. art. To ſuffer,
& 0 more, but, to loſe things tn3/jed,
whether appertaining t0 nature, or n0t
appertaming thereto, or, to be bronght
from power to alt; and therefore, A-
riſtotles tenth ſeat,ot ſuffering,impor-
teth the whole nature, of every indi-
viduall effe, andſubicR, ag it 1s an
effec,
| | would not depart from it vnles hee |
_— —— — y._—_—_
—_m———
| The Art of Logicke.
cttc&, and ſubie&t, Now, I concciue, |
that, this is wholy agrecable vnto A-
riftotles meaning 3 becauſe, in his doc-
trine of predicated arguments, hee
ſpeakes not a word, ot cffefts, and
| ubies.
This Do&rine 15.peculiar to Ars
fotle: Rams doch not acknowledge
| itz for, he hach not a word of ut : Ic
{ may bee, he conceived, that, 1. To
| ſer downe all the ſears of arguments
inoneplace rogether, would breed a
needles repetition, 2, Theſe lingle |
\termes did not appertaine to Logic.
3- The firſt ſubſtance, or thing ſub-
ieed,in every ſentence, hath not che
nature of an arguinent. Itis very hike- |
ly, that, he chonghtchus; becaulc, |
this doctrine of Ari/torle hath becne
anciently recemued ; therefore, hee
had fome reaſon for it; and I con-
| cciuc, he had no reaſon, bur theſe 3.
I anſwer, theſethree arguments bee
| inſufficient : The firſt, becauſe Ari-
| fotle doth neuer repeat z or handle
| theſe ten ſeates of arguments ewiſc:
+ but,
gRo—_ WR_ RN —— a — ——
20
—— .. —— — - —
The art of Locke, |
—
- ynto our vnderſt inding; for, he doth
but, inſtead of them fomctmec hee
brings 1n the do&trine of a definition,
Propertie, Genus, Accident, as the
things, which are contained, in choſe
ren ſcatesofarguments: and, this wee
tinde nrhe 8, and 9. chapters of the
firſt booke of his Topscks, Some 0-
cher ime, he fetsout, the nature of 0-
ther arguments: but, they arcſuch, as
are either, contained in thele 4. - or |
ariſefromthem ; and, ( at moſt) hee |
doth but explicate at large, theſame
things,that he had ſet downelumma-
rily, inthe ro.places atorclaid,
Neuher, 15 the {econdreaſon good :
tor, thoſe 10, things, are propoun-
ded, not as mecre and{imple beings:
bur, in reſpec of that refle&1on, or
relation which ariſeth out of them, )
intend them,asthcy may bee firto ar-
gue, and ſerue vnto the framing of
diſputartons, either in ſingle propoli-
cons,or 1n ſyliogiſmes,as humſclte ex-
preily ſhewerh, in the 8.and g. chap-
ters alledged: and, this is alſo evident,
by the properties which he aſſigneth
vnrto |
at
|
firſt ſubſtance, or ſubic&t part of eve-
ry ſentence, hath iruly, and properly,
thenatureot an argument, tor, it bath
arclation, or cmanation vnto many
{things, that may be added,or attribu-
cd tot; ſoas, We concemeitto bega;
receptiue thing, x. of the cauſes wher-
of itis compounded,and conſticured,
2, of the properties flowing from it,
3. andot outward additions, where-
by it 1s beautificd and made to differ,
and dillentfrom other, and whereby
it 1s made cquall, orvnequal}l, like or
vnhlike vnto others : as we (hall playn-
ly ſee, when we coine tothe particu-
lars ; and, 1t1s plaine, chat Arsorle
vnderftoodthat argument, which be
callsthe firſt ſubſtance, after this ſort:
for, in thelayd 5. chapter of his Cate-
govies, be ſazth, it is proper unto the firſt
ſubſtance to recerue contraries,as fichner,
end health, blacknes, and whighes, ana
C3 thereby
.
S TH4.44 44
| The Art of Logicke, 21
| vntothem: waz , They contame truth,
or falſhood, affirmation, or negation,
when one of chews 1s atzributed to the o-|
ther, |
T he third alſo is inſufficientyfor the 7,
_ —_—
The Art t of " Logicke,
ET
—
thereby to be changed, from well to ill,
whue to blacke.
The onely doubt is, whether an
individuall effeR, and ſubie& bec
ſome wayes predicated or not. Ra-
ws faych yea ; and brings them as
predicated arguments, Ars/torle doth
not fo, and no doubt, he hath the
truth. No indiuiduall cffc&t, is pre-
dicated, I haue three reaſons for i it:
firſt, we neuer find any ſuchpredica-
tion, in the formall wricings inthe
ſchooles, 2, No man can ſay, this in-
diu;duallthing conſiſting offoule,and
bodie, isthis man: for, © predicate
1sletle knowne then the abieA;The
ſubie& cngendreth diſtin andcer-
taine knowledge: becauſc,it compre-
hendeth all the cauſes, but no man
much, 3.The _— of the ſchools
1s nt it, I will alleadge mae
for them all, An integral whole
(laych he) 2.p.9. 77. art. 1.44 1. is
mor m—R— of all the parts together,
properly as when we ſay, theſe
ra cient ref is this
|
will ſay fo, of the predicate, nor ſo|
houſes
mm ——_— —_— CN Cr CEE Www —
2 The art of Ligicke,
hoxſe, For the lubic z the matter is)
yet more cleere, we cannot (ay, thus
learning, 1s chis man, Thowas ſayth
muly 1. p.9q. 29. ft. 3.44 3® Acc
dents dos mwns/eff the ſubie2; buthee |
neuerſzyd, nor any man elſe, that,
che ſubict doch manteſt the acct
dent 4 and no maruaile why :; for, if
the ſubieft be predicatedof the acci-
dent, then we muſt conceme;that, the
accident is without, and betorc the
(ſubteRt: bur no man will ſay ſo: ther-
[fore we may conclude, the indiui-
duall effet, and fabicR, are ficly
comprehended, vnder the name ofa
firſt ſubſtance, Thus, I haueſer downe,
and explicaced, the generall natuce
of argumenes, and,the ſpeciall nature
of that argument, whuch is alwayes ;
fubicted or argued. In the nexe
place, I come to thoſe arguments,
which be alway predicated.
|
C4 Cna?.
—
Ramuis.
Ee —_
Cnan lll. |
The diſtribution of predicated |
|
| CAYgUments, |
|
abſolutely. |
} cnn) |
Poſitine after a fort
A 79 Diſſentmg.
ments be , |
| C Comparative. T
e A poſitine argument, # that which if
| . ateributed firmeply, and abſolutely |
con/ſedered in u ſcife © not compared
with others.
| A conſeming argument i that which t |
| . predicatedojthe ſubielt offrmatine-
OE
Finde this dotrine of politiue ar-
guments, deliwered by Ariſtotle al-
jo, and I will (hey it in his dorine of
conſenting arguments; 1n the ſecond
Chapter of bis Cagegories, hee ſayth,
| ſomze arguments be of rhe ſubiett, aud 0-
the ſome, mthe [ubieft: thoſe 1 ſay be
The Art of Logicke, |
nat ——___ =
— -w——_ <_<HDoS 4, —eo——_— CT CERES
_— .
mT m— |
" \
\$ 8
The Art of Logicke.
25
'n the ſubi:f, which are no parts of it,
nor can be without that thing 1n which
they ave. The ſamething 1s raught by |!
Thomas, yet more plainly, r-p. 4. 25. |
art. 6, [n,cor. Some arguments ( lai |
he ) be of the eſſence, and other ſome,
without the eſſence of the ſubiett, of
which they are predicated, 1 lay, thus of '
Thomas,and that of Ariſtetle are the ;
ſam, with the laſt two branches, of |
Ramns his. divilien : or ( at leaſt ) itis
comprehended in chem : fcr, choſe
that beof the elſcnce, doe ablolurely
agree with the ſubic&, of whoſe
ellence they be, They that be 1n the
ſubieR, but withourthe etlence ther- |
of doc agreetothe ſubictt atrer a ſorr, |
ſecing therefore, they agree inthole |
twolaſt branchcs,they mult agree alſo
inthe formcrbranches of the diviſion: |
lecing, every argument that agrees ab-
ſolutely, doth conſent polituely with
the ſubieR, of which they be predica- |
ted; and conſequently, it is enough |
tothe vnderſtanding of the wholegif |
we doe explicate, and proſecute,thoſe
twolaſt branches: and,becauſc I ſup-
poſe,
a_
—
— Je-
Oo mon _——
———
Foy
1
i © : <5
42 "
gi
þ
$
2
#..4-
> #
4
4
y .
3
$
MES: CDCL 0 cet CA oe - er Re. ood roo ”
The Art of Logicke,
poſe, that the terms of Ariſtotle, and
Thomas, be moreſignificant, and fit, I
thinke it beſt to follow them,
3. [ Of the eſſence] By thele words,
are ſcroutſucharguments as be ellen-
tall vnto the thing, of which they are |
predicated:now, all the cauſes be of
this kinde, for as much,asthe cftc& is
conſtitueed by all the cauics, as Tho-
was hath taught vs in 2. diſt. 27.9. 1.
4rt.2, 44, gÞ. he ſaith the effelt 55 con-
ftituted by all the cauſety( that 11) each
one in its kind, and maner of working ;
for, all of them, doe coneur, and beſtow
their force, unto the procuring of the
thing to be. Theſe arguments be all
comprehended in the 9, place of ar-
guments viz,, To ave.
—I—_
—
CCC _——
{ Mi The Art of Logicke,
Cri F,
The Definition of 4 Cauſe.
1 Canſe is that, by force whereof, a
thing "YA
His argument, which we call a
Cauſc, i ſometimes taken for e-
very thing whereypon gncther followe::
[ andio ſaich Okew;1.dft.1.4.3.41.N.
'f wherefare ( as the ſame Okem (ayth)
| I. diff. 41, lit. F, A Cavſe i taken
| 10 wayes 3 Sometimes, for every thing
that hath another thing, as an effett
Thereof; and z 4nd, [onetime alſo, for a prope-
ſition, whereof another doth follow:
| thus farre Okers.
| © | A Cauſe inthisplace, istaken,not
| (olargely, as in Okeass hiſt and chird
(ſenſes: but, in theſecond, A Can/e
\ in this notion , & a!/o taken for the \*
thing it ſelfe which doch caxſe ; and |
| Comm alſo, for the nature of Cau- |
or, for the thing,u ut doth exerciſe |
Can in att, or, for the relation of |
—— —
Ras,
——_
——_—
_ — FY ent eo.
CA ——y
The Art of Leigicke.
— — ———
Cauſing : A Canſe, us taken im the ſe-
cond ſenſe" this definutior ; Wherefore,
A ( auſe 18 that, of which the effett, e-
ven by ut ſelfe acpendeth. Thus terre
the Leſmites m their Preface wnto Por-
phyrie.
By this it1s maniteſt;that, Rawas,
and Ariſtotle, doe tully agree in the
defining of a Cauſe,and in the cxpli-
cation of that definition * "29am.
we need not ſay more fot che open.
ing chereotza few examples wil make
it calily vaderſtood;bur,we may not
doe that in thus place, 1-aſt we be for-|
ced to repeate fie lamething againe,
when we come to the particulars,
En Core oof
C uSY..
The Diſtribution of 4 Cauſe,
There be-foure FE Viicient and Matter,
Cauſes: the. | Forme, aud End.
\
fuck vniverſall agreement
1n tus precepe alſo, . dr/forde
makes
UC A oe Eee I
Art ttt tt dt oe
The Art of Logicke,
| makes them thee toure, as Wee may
finde, 1n the 11, chapter of the ſecond
| booke of his Poſteriornms 5 his words
| be thele:
| I.That whith peweth what |
a thing t5, |
There be | 2.That whuh nmſt be when
4:( anſes,,, ;the thing 45,
'3 That which moxeth fir#t,
| He hit the 214 Gigi the fift
booke of bis Meta byfichs and 2.3 chap-
ter. Thomas. doth follow tum, and
doth teach the lame things 1N 1%. 24.
q. 72. art.3.imcor,and no man thinks
otherwiſe: therefore, I will deſcend,
to Vnfold the nacure of the particu-
The Art of Logicke.
Cam YiL
Of the Efficient Cauſe.
TheEfficient Cauſe is that, from which,
the thing 18,
[ Efficient] This word imports no
more z but, to doe, or to bring to |
pale: and, therefore, ir ſignifieth, the
othce of all the Cauſes, and conle-
quently, irſeemes not fit to be given
vnto any one Cauſe diſtinAly : yer
notwithſtanding,we muſt know cles
there is good reaſon thus to call it;
elle, the learned of all ages would nor
hauc giuen it tharname yea, the ve-
ry nature of it deſerues we ſhould call
it {03 as we ſhall ſec in the next paſ-
ſage,
[ From which | Theſe words doe
ſet out the nature, or office of that
Cauſe, which is called Efficient : and
lignific the originall, or fountaine,
from whence the effe& doth recemue
cts being, I ſay the effe,and Imeane
the |
—_—
- ;
oe > _ m—
—_— ——_— wy — ———_— m——
_ The art of Logicke.
the whole effe&t ; for;this Cauſe doth |
' ioyne together all the other Cauſcs, |
| whereot the effec 15 compounded:
' asnamely,itbeſtowerh the torme vp-
' on the matter, and doth deftinateche
| matter formed vnto the producing of
' ſomething char is good: and there-
| fore,it delcrues well to be called Eth-
| ent. The forme doth make the ef-
feat tobe of this, or that kinde : che
matter formed, doth make the effe&t
co be this, orchat individuall thing :
the end makes it fir for this or that
good: bur, the motion and efficacy
of the e{hcient Cauſe onely, doth
giue being vnto the eficR in the c-
vent, Wee haue many examples of
this Cauſc,and the operation thereof;
we findeone inthe ſecond of Geneſss,
the (caventh verſe, where it is ſayd,
God formed man, of the duſt of the
onud, axd breathed into bim the
eath of tife, and he became a lin-
6g ſonte, |
In this example,themaking ofman
1s attributed vnco God:theretore God
15fayd to be the Efficient Cauſe of
' man :
—_——
_ FOI"_R i
— _
bo”
F * _
+ wolf |
ge. Hl /
% '
* IF 1
”
= yp .
- he + Fa d
x | ;
p75 '
ju J
$ +)
| }
x i
Fs
$4
'f
% kl
Þ
: £
ds. E TIF 5
3
. ;
—_
The Art of Locke.
———
man: the office of this ettictency, 1s
placed in joyning the forme vnro
the maiter;he framed him of the duſt,
| there 15 the rhatter, and breathed life
{1nto him, and chereby the forme is
1npoled on the marter,and then,God
did deſtinate him to an end, viz. The
ations of ite, thereby he made him
a living ſoule.
We haue another thelike example
inthe 11. of Geneſss, the 3.and 4.ver,
| where it is reported z that,
The men of the earth, did build a
high tower of bricke, and ſlume ; for
a memoriall of their name.
builders of the tower, and thereby
they became the efficient cauſe of the
whole worke : they take bricke, and
frame it jnto a tower; therefore,they
10ynethe matrerand forme together :
they deſtinate the ſame vuto an end;
carch. And, thus much ſhall futhce,
to ſet out the nature of the ethcient
cauſe, Wee ſhould now divide an ef-
ficient cauſe into the ſeverall kindesy
but,
21z.thecontinuanceof their nameon '
- Themen of the earth, are made the |
|
The Art of Logicke.
bur, that we cannot: for ( a5 Rams
truely {ayes ) they are mnknowne wuto
vs, therefore we will ſet downe, the as
vers, and Yerious manner, whereim the
efftcrent canſe doth worke : for that s:
well knowne, and doth helpe 1s much,
v2 the underfianding of the office of ths
C anſe,
The effuctent cauſe \ By ut ſelfe.
doth worke, |} By accident.
A Canſe doth then worke by it ſelfe,
| when it worketh by force of, and accor-
ding unto the inbred funeſſe there-
We finde this diſtintion, and the
explication thercof, 1n the Schooles
of all ages. The efficient cauſe { layth
Thomas ) workes,by it ſelfe, or by accs
|
þ
dent ; the firſt 1s, when ut moneth by its
| Owne proper vertae ; The ſecona, when
| which remames, is bindred from work-
ing, 1.26. 9. 76.art.1.8n cor. It wee
loyne Okham vito Thomas, weelhall
finde this matter fully opencd ; 4
Canſe by accrdent ( layth Okhaw. 1, diff.
ſomething 6s rewoned therefromor that|
2:4. 10, it. B. H. ) i that, which
D worketh
—
Ramuss
CE nn A nn I OI
bo. 7
— - —— — — _ _ __—
7 ——
34
Ti be Art of Logicke,
worketh by a thing different from it
ſelfe, and a cauſe, which workes by tt |
ſelfe t that which cauſeth the effett ac-
cording to its proper nat re, and not ace
cording to ſome other thing, which ont-
waraly doth befall ut. | |
The efficient doth worke by it (clfe, |
in naturall things, when it moues ac- |
cording vntothe inſtin&, and inbred
diſpolition of nature : aswhen the Ji-
ving Creature ſecth, eatcth, (leepeth,
avoydeth knownedanger. The plants
grow vpright, bring forth leaues, and
truit, in due ſeaſon; So doth it worke
by ic ſeltc1n che incelleuall creature,
when man moues himſclfe vnto do-
ing, by the dirc&ion of cruc reaſon,
and the vnreſtrained, and free choyſe
of the will.
Naturall things doe worke by acci- |
dent, when the inſtin& of nature is
ſuppretſcd, or diverted, The intel-
le&uall creature workes by accident,
when the indgement of reaſon 1s er-
romous, and the clioyle of the will,
Carricd by a previall over-ruling pow-
cr, and ail thele doe tall out, in caſc, |
: where ;
_—..
——_—
'r0 e/Egypt, to preſerne their lines.
The Art of Logicke;
TES
The vnderſtanding is pollelled with
ignorance, or the will haled by che
where nature meets with defeAion,
naughtinelle of corruption, and vio-
lence of temptation, Laftly, the ſecrer |
providence of God ( which the Heathen |
called fortune) makes the creature work |
- accident : 1n all Calcs when he.
workes againſt mcanes, as he did,
|
when he brought che pcople through |
the red Sea, Exodws the 14. and, as |
he doth in all miraclcs;or when man
incenderh one thing, but another
thing comes to patle: of this, we haue
an example in the 45.of Geneſss,and
5-verſ. & 37. & 29.verſe, In this
\ place, they arc ſayd to ſell Joſeph, be-
| cauſe they would be rid of him ; and,
in that, /oſephſayth, God ſent him in-
| They were the ctticient Cauſe of
cheir owne preſerving, when they
ſold leſeph ; but, yer by accident,
rough Gods ſecret providence,
; that wrought contrary tocheir intent,
The Jewes, likewiſe, were the Cauſe
. of Chriſts glory, and mans falyacion,
| 2 when
— _—
—— ——
236 The Art of Logicke,
| when they delivered bim to death
*| bug, yet by accident, becauſe God
himiclfe did create light out of dark-
netle, and madctherr evill intention,
do I ns Oe Somme re ern em rr ee rer— an ts
| this preſent,
| a The efficient 4h 6
aoth worke Morrath.
| | | This diſtin&tion, 1Sreceived in all
| the Lopich ſchooles, and, is of fre-
| | quent vſe, inthe queſtion couching
{anRification, andthe aftuall mott-
on of grace, in mans cgpverſion: the
| Reader may find it in Suarez opuſc.1.
1 lib. 3. Cap. TO. no, I» andin many O-
a | |} ther places, A Phylicall operation,
dl 15a rcall influence into the eff<&, we
$8 haue an example of this in mans crea-
>” | tion : He formed him, and that of
KF; the duſt, and poured life into him, all
| theſe be reall influences:of this kinde,
are
A
” —_— En oe _—_— _
—T..+i5 Ss
&. 4. wi
MES ans
q 3 »
|
ſcruevnto that good, There be ma- |
ny examples,wherein wee findethat, |
che efficient cauſedoth worke on this |
manner: but theſe are enough, for |
| |
|
——
| | ro know, that then they areeffici-
— ——— . _ re o__—_——_— er rn nn tr r—_ —
The Art of Logicke.
arethe builders ofthe Tower of Ba-
belt they made bricke, and reard a
building with bricke, and ſtone ; Of
this ſort, be all workemen that labour
with their hands, and tooles, the
ſtrength of nature, doth immediatly
flow into the thing that is wrought,
making a xeall and ſen{ible change
in the matter where on they worke.
A morall worke, is a motion of-
fered to the ynderftanding,and ſerucs
to allure,and draw it on with reaſons,
and perſwaſion. Of this kinde, bce'
be allſuch things, as be obieed to
the vnderftanding, as namely, the
teltimonie of God, and man, by com-
manding, forbidding, promiſing,
threatning, perſwading, therefore,
(o often as wee finde, any of thele
attributed ro God, or man, wee are
_ ——
ent cauſes, that worke morally,
Ramnr deth call Teſtimonies, Ex-
hort ations, Commandements, 5c, m-
artificiall arguments, becawnſe, they
argue, not of their owne force, but, by
| the ant boritic of hins that doth teſt
ifie:
| =: but,
—_—
pO CE
OO EI
_—— ———— . d—__— 4
La IV , :
» *% 7 _ : .
WARES or a5 bs
o 'Y þ 3 o ” _ < 8
os op OO WE 2. 5h
-
| | Fhe 4 rt of Logicke. | |
bur, this 15 alcogether vnficly lpoken, |
for inartificiall, and argument, un- |
plycs a contradi&tion, it inartficiall,
chcen no argument 1t an argument | '
7.0 then artific1all, tor an argument 15a |
| | member of Art.z, Theſethings them-|
| ſclues arc no arguments, vnicile they |
| be refcrred vnto the Teſtator, but
0 then they argue as properties or ad-
1 jun&ts, and otherwayes they arc ne-
ver attributed to any ſubject, In chis
| place affirmation, perlwaſion, &c.
are not brought as morall cauſes in
themſclues : but the cauſaline is re-
ferred to him: that affirmeth, perſwa-
deth &c, which makes it very plaine,
that, they belong to this place or {eat
of arguments, God, and his ſervants,
are the morall cauſes of mans holi-
nes, when they command good,and
| torbid ill, when they pronuſe good,
and threaten ill, when they perlwadc
vnto obedience, and dillwade from
ſinne, thus our Saviour Chriſt is che
morall cauſe of all ſupernatural
things, when by his obedience, he
deſerved, chat God ſhould beſtow
them |
mt
mm —_——_—
D--—<m—_ CT
, A EINER _ - -
3 PL - ba
Ts > oy :
- * ,
jo
CT A —— — ES
_— I—_—
Pg
«
- . s + *
*
a—
[
he
[ "The art of Logtcke, |
| them vpon vs, he by meriing( Ilay) |
| i5the morall cauſeot Gods gifts, be-
cauſe by his merits hee moycth God
; to beſtow them : and (b much ſhall
| ſuthce for this diſtin&tion, |
_
Principall )
A Phyſs- ſecond,
Call efficient is
Inſtrumental.
ThisdiſtinRion 1s very ancient in
the ſchooles; and of great vie, when
we delireto know, how mans will is
wrought vpon, and worketh with the
atuall motion of Godsgrace z Al- |
warez received it from Themas, and
makes vyſc of it. di/p. 68. 10.5: fc. |
where, hec doth thus deſcribe cach |
member of it. |
A principall efficient #s that, which
worketh out of is owne power, or
forme, as Thomas ſayth,1.p.q.18.art.
3. incor. A firſt principall efhcient,is
that which worketh onely, out of 1ts
owne power, Thus God only work-
my D 4 ch
——— — _
The Art of Logicke. |
| To conclude,the point touching
| the
ch, of whom is ſayd, bee ſitteth in
Heaven, and doth what be wil.
'_ Heisthevnuwerſall cauſe: tor
in biz we line, and mone, and hatte our
being.
A ſecond prigcupall efficient i that, |
which is ſo moved by avother, that it
wmoveth ut [eife, by a power of its owne.
Of this ſort 5 mans mind, which ts no-
ved by God ,yetneverch-letle ir work-
eth out of an a&tiue beginning, re-
mainng 1n it ſelfe, Ot chus (ort, be all
thoſe ſayings in the Scripture, which
attribure mans good workes, as his
converlion, and the like, ſomerimes, |
vato God alone, and other ſome-
times, vnto manalone. |
An wſtrament ( properly taken, and
ſo we ſpeake of it here ) is that, which
warketh onely out of a power recerved
from the principall efficient, of this
kinde are all inſtruments without |
lite, as namely the tooles of a Car-
penter, or Smith, &c: Thus hot wa-|
ter, heateth another thing that iscold,
by the heate recerved from the fire,
——
Rm...
— — _
#
a ——
— ————_ ————_ — —_— - - -- _—
—_—_—
| "The Art of Logicke, 41
the efficient cauſc,wee arc to know, |
ter oe of theſe waies, whether « works
alone, or with others, whether ut begins
the worke, or preſerwes it, veing atrea-'
die made. |
NAD GRND
C nav®, VIII. |
a thing is, |
{ Matter.) This word is often times |
vied to fet' out every bodily fub-'
ſtance: bur it-1s not {o taken 1n this
place, for ( aS Thomas layth, 1. P. 9-7:
art. I.tncor.) The matter (aSitisa
| matter ) remainerh onely in power, |
or c3pacitie to receiue many formes : |
and therefore, according. to it ſclfc
hath no being, nor can be obieacd |
tour vnderitanding: 1,p. 9.15: art.
3. a4 3®, In this place it {igrifics a bo-
aly ſubſtance informed, or ſome in-
| telleAuual) thing anſwerable vnco that,
© [4 |
O—
that, the efficient, alwayes worketh af- R aus, |
}
|
\ The matter, its a Canſe of which Rams, |
T..
Gp— we Og _
—_ He.
The Art of Logicke,
| A cauſe ] Thele words doe at-
cribute an auue power, and aftuall
efficacy vnto the matter, wherby the
ett 18 produced,
[ Of which} Theſe words ſhew the
nature of that efficacy, and the maner
how the matter doth concurre vnto
the eftef: and. importeth che thing
that ſoreceiuesthe torme, that ut reſt-
eh and remaineth in it. This we fee
\ inanhouſe, wherinthe timbr,ſtone
| &c. are tramed, and faſhioned roge-
ther, and made fit for habitation: ſo
doth a peccc of timber recciue the pi-
Auure made vpon it by a carver.
[ 4 thing s | By [ thing ] 15 meant
the effe&t produced : bo [1/5]
meant ctlentally, fo as, the matter 1s
2 part of the {lence viz, in a ſecond
degree, or nation, Wee-conceiuethe
timber &c. Of a houleto be a partof
It; but we know, that there 1s an 0-
cher part therof more principall be-
fore that ;: namelygthe forme & faſhi-
on thereof, A rhing, ſignifies an indi-
viduall effe&t, ſo as, the office of the
matter 15to bringthe effe& vntoalin-
gu=
_— —
——
— — Cc —_— - _
—
| The Art of Locke. 43
ular, or individuall being :rhus all |
Philoſophers doc conceiue of it, 7 be |
matter 11 the principium of maids: |
| ation, ſaith Thomas. 1.p. q. $6. art. ze
in cor, And againe, the eſſence 18 re |
ſtrained unto one indrviduall thing by
the matter. 1.P. q. 7. art. 3- incor, |
We haue an inftancc of this, in e- |
very (ingular creature, Peter, 15 a lin-
gular man by his body, every plant, 1s
{ingular by the tem chat groweth |
vp ; torthey inioy all other things in | 6
common with thereſt of cheir kinds. | | | |
| The foulcot Perey hath the ſamera- |
p tonalitiewith all other mens ſoules: | |
| no ſingular tree differs from other | |
trees 11 vegititie, Hanciitie makes |
menchriſtians:Pexeys ſanftitie makes |
Peter a chriſtian, becauſe the holy
Ghoſt dwelsin his morcall body, i
J Thus argument bringsthe lubie& '
ro which 1t is attributed, vnto our ©
clecre vnderſtanding, and ic 15of (in- |
gular vſe,to make vs knowthe nature
> and diſtinion of particular beings. |
Yea,otablolute neceſlitie:for(thac I
may vſe the words,andreafon of Ari- |
Me fe otle
wu uw RO aan ww eo——— —e—— ————— Woo
*
—_
The Art of Lygicke.
__ — TIT
| flotle, Meta. Lib. 2. Cap. 1 text. 11)
It isnot poſſible to know vnuill wee
come vnto indwuidualls, It is impoſli-
bleto know vntyl we atame vntochole
things which doe not admir diviſion:
for things that are infinite cannot
pollibly be comprehended by our
vnderitandings. We hauc a preg- |
nanr example of itinthe 1, Cor. 15.
39 &c. Where, the Apoſt!c doth de-
icribe, and deſtinguiſh diners kinds
of {ingular bodies, and fach, ſome be
ccleftiall, as the Sunne, Moone, and
ſtars, Other ſome be terreſtnall, and
thoſe be ſpirituall, as mans body that
15rayſed: other ſome be naturall, 4zz
the fleſh of men, bealts and birds:and
from hence he deliuersthenature and
difference of glory that theſe particu |
lar beings doe inioy, Likewiſc, the
holy Ghoſt Rewe/,21 18.8c. Makes
vs know, what the new [eru{alem 1s,
by the matter thereof, The examples
of this kinde are very frequent, and
well knowne to every man ; there-
fore, I take this to be ſufficient for the
explication of the mateniall _
HAP,|
med ._——.._—_—_—_
ne CI —
—— —
——
———
— —"Y
|
|
U « Þ* f
.| Not this word, at thisume,in cither of
ſame : Thus ſaith 7homas. 1.p.9.7.art.
—_— —_— DA a ee nr. <———
2 The Art of Logicke, 45
Gn 4A *% 4
Of the forma!l Cauſe.
ef forme, is a Canſe, by which a thing Rams.
is that, which ut 15,
[ Forme. ] As | ſaydofthe matter, T.
ſo muſt I {ay of che forme : If it be
conlidered in it ſelte, abſtrated from
all matrer, and individualitie, it 1 4
Certatne thing common vnto many : (0
Thomas truly ſayth, 1. p. q. 7. 4rt-1+ in
cor. 2, Vnder the name forme, ſome- |
times 1s cemprehended 41 fignve , which
eonſiſteth m the termination of 4 quan-|
titie. Thus allo IFhaue from Thewas.
«7, art, 1. 4d 2”, But wee take |
theſe ſences, By forme then wee here
vnderftand, the intrinſicall part of the
compounaed effeft : lo ſfayth Suarez,
zi. diſp. 10. ſet. 1, n*, 7. thatis,
Recerved of the matter, mforming the
I. cor.
A forme
OS LNIOT Ir morn BE - pm; >:
4 EF. *. "4 Xx, 4 4:
|
| 4s The Art of Logicke,
Ks J i 2 | Gener all,
"gp 2. A forme((aith Thom)
Fs! Special. |
A ſpeciall forme is that which infor ms |
the jubiett, but it ſelfe 15 not informed
by any uther forme of the ſame AALRYE 3
as one colowr is not informed by another
| colour, 2. diſt. 27,9. 1-a4rt.2, 4d 1”,
| Forme 1n thus place, is taken in theſe-
M |: cond ſence,not in the firſt. Wee haue
an cxamplc of this, in the rationalirie
of man, and vigiditie of plants: both
of them are tormes, and diitin& be- |
ings, not receiving any thing from 0-
__———}.
& || ther formes of their kinde,
j 3 [ 114 (aw/e] (Thatis) ithathau-
> I\} | all exerciſed force to inferre the ct-
þ | feft.
i 4 [ By which | Thele words doe ſhew,
: that, the force of the forme, 15 not re-
ceptiue,norretentiuc,nor reſtriiue, |
a5 the force of the matter 15 : but 1t 1s
aQue: for { as Ariſtotle ſaith, Meta.
lib, 9.cap. 6.text 17.) The forme is an
alt ; (thatis) an actuall, dcterminare,
"and aQtiue being : the Reader may fee
this matter fully opened by Gull. |
1col. 467. [4 bis
——___W_W.
—
—xx
Eos 9 of Logicke. |
[.4 thing is ] By thele words,the =
ſence of eyery individuall effeR,zisat-
tributed co the formall cauſe : ewery
thing that doth attnally exi} ((aith
Thomas, 1.p.q.7-4rt. 2.mncor.) hath
| [ome forme ; and againe, every being 5
| canſed by the forme thereof, 1.P. 9.51,
art. 4, m cor,
[ That which. ] Theſe words doc
attribure the whole effe& vnto the
forme: and this is agreed vpon by the
learned in all ages. Each thing 15that
which it «s, by 1s forme : thus Thomas
thinketh, 1.p. q. 5. art. 5. & ad 3m
cor. The whole compound is the effect
of the forme ; in the mdgement of O-
hars. 1. aſt, 32:4q.1,& 2.it.C, And
this ſentence agrees well with the na-
tureof the thing ; for, the matter doth
.' finite, and contraft th: amplitude of the
forme aud thereby it becomes the deter-
"minate forme of this, or that tnary1dg-
all effet?.T he forme, on che other fide,
doth perfit and determine the mattcr,
and bring it, from power, to att, by gi-
wing aneſſexce thereunts : in ſo much,
that, by the forme the eſſence 35 termi-
— — — ">
ved |
ce
PL.
——_
— ew ack i)
| CE en een
The Art of Logicke.
wed unto ſome ſpetiall kinde. And thus
much wee reccuue from Thomas, 1. p.
Ge7 Art 1oet 3-21C07.9.14.40t-2.40 1.
This argument 1s of necellary vic,
co inſtruct our vnderſiandings 1n the
knowledge of the ſubic, to which
It 18 attributed: for, how can we know
athing more clecrely,and certainely,
then when wee finde the intrin(icall,
Primary, and proper nature, and be- |
ing thereof, /r 55 all one ſaith Ariſto-
tle 2. poſt.cap.Y.40 know the nature of
thing, and to know the canſe of its na-
ture, Wee haue examples of this
kinde of Cauſe, in the word of God,
and the nature of the Creature: when
God would ſhew vs what ftnne 1s, he
doth ſer it out by the forme thereof,
Sime({ayththe Apoſtle J9hn 1.Epilt,
chap. 3.V.4.) 1s 4 warning fromthe |
Law: The Apoſtle Paw/, when he
would (cr out, what the prongs
of faith is, he doth deſcribeit ( in his
Epiſtlero the Romans ch.g.v.6.7.8.)
by fergineneſſe of ſinnes. The holy
Ghoſt doth yecld vs many of theſe
cxamples, but thele ſhall ſuthce,
p21
In
——— —— tt
|
b- The Art of Lopicke.
In man we hauea full repreſentati-
on of every part of this COD
Wee ſay, rauonalitic is the tormall'
cauſe of man. Now, x. Rationalitie is|
the incrinſecall part of man, all other
of his parts, arc inore overt,and better j
knowne, 2. Rationaliic hath a force}
to beſtow a being vpon man : for,
when God had drawne together the|
duſt of the carth, man had not ( as
then) his being:burzke recciued that,
when God breathed the breath of lite
1nco ur; atthat time ( Ifay.) and not
before, man became a lung loule. |
3- Rationalitic beſtowes vpon.man a
being, chat is atuall, and determined
vnto one, and atiue ; whereby he 15
fit to dve che ations of life, 4. There
is nothing ctlentiall vato man z bur
hisrationahtite beſtowes 1t on him:
The body ( indeed ) doth make him
a (ingular man,by reraining,and con-
| rafting the foule vnto one ; bur, 11
what reſpe& he 15a man, that here-
celues wholy from his ſoule, and
trom hence, tbe forme « rruety /ayd to
| be the beg tuning of r {ata # be-
Iweene
ii
—_— De eat.)
oO
The Art of Logicke, |
tweene one and another ,and not the dif-
ference it ſelfe, Thom. 1. diſt. 25. q.1.
things doth flow from the forme: |
for,as vnitie in ſubſtance doth make two
things to be the ſame, 25 Okam doth
Da. teach, 1. 4/t. 19.9. 1. lit. B, 0-
'pinio 1%, and Ariſtotle, meta. lib. 5.
cap. 15.text. 20.10 difference 1n ſub»
ſtance makes two things to differ,
The forme is not the difference it
ſelte : for,a forme isa ſubſiſtence 1n an
vnitie:bur, a difference is a diſſenting
betweene the etlence of two : and
thus much for the cxplication of the
formall Cauſe.
EESTSEE SF HSE}
"FW .uSÞ «6
Of the fixall Canſe,
The end ts a cauſe for which the
thing is,
| [End] By end 8meant the laft no-
ton which wee haue of the cfca:
»» <_—_—
—
and | |
art. 1.442, Ifay, rhe difference of | |
1
The Art of Logicke.
dif- and emporteth that mherewnto the
7.1. | * |rbing rendeth, So Ariſtetle tellerh vs,
cof| | era, hb. 2.cap. I. text. 9.
IT | Externall, | |
oc | | | An end u ATE = ixzent of rhe doer. ?.
ethmg «< naturally
0+ nal, w ſeife 3 papoſed
v4 An externall end, 1s the aQuall vſe
Fer, of thething, to which ctheeffeR 1s fit- X
eit| | | ted, Thus che beatificall viſion is Wt
an! | mansend, to which hercends, An end | +
ng | * 1n the intent of the docr, is no more C
nd buceither the ficnes (it {elfe) of the ef-
j
/
feft chought vpon, and purpoſed by
rhe efficient ; (this1s the condition of
. \every workman,thatdcviſcthandre-
IL | folueth vpon the taſhion, and form: |
of the thing to be wrought) Orthe
- | commoditic ofthe workman, and o- |
| chers, ſought thereby,
Wee hauc example of an end, thus
' vnderſtood, in thoſe words of /ohn 3.
| 16.God /o loned the world ec. Whcre
the giving of Chrift is an effec,
; wrought by God, wherein he inten- |
. ded the glory of himſelfe, and his
+ 2M ſonne,
_- —<—-— <A > Ie-—_—o— ww o—_ m—_ — a. — —
———
|
|
|
|
32
The Art of Legicke.
ſonne, and the ſalvation of che pre-
deitinate, Thus the workman that |
makes an axe intends, that humſelte |
ſhall get repucaion, aud maintenance |
thereby,
An ond of a thing impoſed vponit |
(15, when che etficient inioyned that vie |
| inucc ite promapuli effi iext Unto wor»!
|eth natwraily, 1 here wnderſiooa, and
of it, which che thing it ſelfe doth not
yecld, andthisend we findein lawes,
and mony z the one is appointedto be |
a rule of obedience, the other to ſer a |
price of wares. Iſay appointed by him |
that hath power to doe it, the things
themlſclues doe not yeeld itz asall men
| doe know by experience, But the
word end in this place doth not [1gni-| |
fic erher of theſe toure things,
The exd(asitisin the intent and |
will of the docr ) # 4 cauſe indeed me-
tapboricatly, not properly, and muſt be
rednced vuto the efficient not the finall; |
for, s in that ſort u aeth but mone, and
|
' king: and conſequently, it 11 an efficient |
' that worge: morally.
T hat ena unto which the effeft ST
de fined. | |
——_
The Art of Lopicke,
OO
C— CCC CC rr me Se —_
things from Thomas 2.95ſt, q, 1.art.1
2. & 3. I-P. 9. 26. art. 3, ad 2®,
Smarez, de predeff lib. 2.cap.Z.n*:;2.
vega in Concil. Trident lib, 7.cap. 2.
{ Acan/e] Thertore the end hath
an actixe, and an exerciſed att, inthe
producing of the effe# : tor, that 1s the
properue of every cauſe, as hath
beenc ſhewed,
[ For which a thing i; ] Theſe words
{ ſet cut the natureof that force: and
they lignific,atendency,aptirude,and
firnes which the effe&t hath nacurally,
vnto ſomething without it ſelfe, /; 5,
| of the nature of a finall cauſe (|, aych
| Okam) attuallytointend : and whatſs-
| euey aoth not jo, 1: not truly, and proper-
| by a finall cauſe 1 Prologo. 1. ſent, q,
. 1.4/4. F.G.Inthe ſame fort writes A- |
' riſtotle meta. b.2.cap.1.text, 8, An
| end ({ayth he) is that for which a thing
| is made, that is, whoſe eſſence is not [0
fer another, that it followes that other:
| but the eſſence of another ſollowes that,
If any inquire how tendency &c.
can hauean acruall exerciſe 'ymto do-
=» 3 ing.
dfined. 1 haue receiued all thele|
% /
A AA
A — q
The Art of Logicke.
|
ing. Firſt lanſweritcan,becauſethar |
tendency Howes fromthe forme,in as
much as the forme doth drtermme the
| effett Unto an en4,according t0Htiowne
| proportton : as the forme of ſteele #5 /acb, |
| 4s beſt firteth with cuttin7, Thomas. 17.
20.94.95 41-3.iucor,Secondly,the end |
importctb ſome good ſoſarth Thomas. 1. |
E:-1 P.9.19.4't.1. £4.1 andall mengrant ;
l it: therforeu huth an exerciſed force
| to conſtit::te, but !:crem it differsfrom
| the furm wwargnb conſtitute good &
| no more:;hisdoth boch conſticute,and |
d:ttuſe good: Itd chconſtituce, in as
| much as, 1t 15 the pertetion of the
i | cfcA. 1 ſay the pertetion of it, be-
| | cauſe, when the effe hath actained
| thi her it wanteth nothing requiſite
to a thing of that kind, It 3s diffuljuely |
| good, in as much as, it is fit, and apt
H | fo beſtow good vpon others, |
n- | | VVee haue many examples that ſhew |
| | ' vs the nature of this —_ Fitnes |
' torule the day and night 3s attributed ;
; tothe Sunne, and Moone Genefss, 1.
| | 14 As a thing that followed their na-
| | ture by creation; thus allo, fitnesto ac-
com-
The Art of Logicke.
company and help Adaws is affirmed |
| of Ewah Gene(#:.2. 18.21, asthe end.
| of her creation, Man is apt, and fitto
louethe knowne good, and that 15
| his end this ficnes lowerh from his '
| reaſonable ſoule or formall being,
whoſe properticic isto judge truly,
and chooſe freely, Now thus firnes
hatha maine ftroake in the conſtiru-|
ting of man, not by the way of moti-
on, tor that belongs to the efficient,
nor by the way of reception, and re-| |
ecnton: for, that belongs to the mat-
ter : bur, by the way of (crled poſition
as the forme doth from-whence it
flowech. 2. By this firnes a man 1s
made a perfit, and compleat humane
creature: for, when he attaines vnio |
that, he wants nothing requiſke vnto
his being, Vncill he be fo ficecd, we |
cannot conceiue him a humane crea- |
ture: for, he would differ Ns
from bruit bcaſts,
| The vſc of this argument 1sof cX+
ceeding worthco informe our vnder-
ſtandings in the knowledge of the
fubiea; ; for, by it we: know. yhe for-|
4 _
|
—_ — —_
56
—— —
The Art of Lootcke, |
__—_—
mall cauſe, and conlequently the na- |
ture of the thing,
To concludethe doctrine of allthe
cauſes 1oyntly 3 we mult not forget,
char, from this place, or ſear ot argu-
ments 15 dermed Wmlodec Gmply
lo called, We are thex thought to knaw
4 thing, when we vnderftand the caſes |
therof, chus ſauch Rawas, And tothe
lainc effec (peaks Ariſtotle knowledge |
fimpty ſo called ( fauh he ) poſter. 1b, 1.
Caps 4 ts neceſſary, that ir, when the
thing cannot be atherwiſe then as we
know it : and we haxe that knowledge,
when we underſtand the cagſes* ſolauh
the ſame Ariſtotle. Poſter. bib, 2, cap.
[|
11. Themas allo hath the ſamething:
knowledge ( (ith he) opuſc.de Lemon.
| Then oxy reaſon doth reſolne the thing
we doe ſo when we underſtand the cau-
ſes of the thing, and that, both asitiua
that thing : and he giues a reaſon here-
of, Opuſc. 48. de Syllog. Cap. I. ViR,
cauſed into its cauſes : from whence
cap. 1 is ro umderſtand of certainty, and |
caſe, and allo as St is acauſe in act, of |
kwowledge doth flow. And thus much
i Gs
— c_
— —— I
44” x
VER +> as
OECD ir Deo PA. 2"
m_a——_—e—_ © —————— —
BTID
The Art of Legicke,
for the finall cauſe, and all chole ar- ;
guments which are predicatcd of the |
cllence of the\ubieR,and which con-
ſequently doe abſolutely agrec there-|
with,
_— — —_— = —_ —
55 "WY Hb 4: 6
Of Propertzes, |
E muſt now proſecute thoſe
V / arguments which impor:
things withour the iubje,andconle- |
quently conſent with it, after ſome |
ſort: of this kinde, beall adiungs, as |
ſome doe call them, |
An adiuntt © that to which [ome-
thing is ſwbiefted, and whatſoever |
deth externally belong, or bappen ro
any [ubieft,
Proper,
An adiunti 63
- ( ommon, |
A proper adinntt is that which be-
longs onto all; þ alone alwaies.
A
Ramnits, |
-”- wy. DA — _ -- - __
-
SVES: ro - Dae | =
ih by OT” SIE NE «i IE # ed Ft I
a * Ro ng EF 33% ## Pe 7% 51 j
— ——
58 The Art of Lygicke, :
\ A common adiantt is that which # | |
| wot proper 81 that ſort. | |
\F| I, eAr:/totle dillents from Rams 11 f
i | theſe precepts:Tbomas layth,t.p.q.77- |
| art. 1.a15®, Not every thing that u, |
| without the eſſence, may be called an | |
accident: Ariſtotle hatch not the rermes | |
ot proper and common adjungt ; nor |
the thing compreheded vnder chem ; |
| bur the contrary z heſayth Top. /9. 1,
au Cap. 5. An acerdent cannot be proper,
Wii | otherms{e then by relation; as when one :
| ſniicth and others ſtand, then ſiting us
| proper to him, Laltly, Ariſtotle and 0-
# thers with him doe make aching pro-
M4 per and an accident 89 aiffer formally,
as we (ha'] preſently inde.
- * Ariſtotle ceacheth, Top. h1b.1. cap. 5. |
} that, Arg1199:nts which are without the | |
{ [ubie#, be properties | ana acciaents.
| | That is ſayd to be proper, that 11 veci-
x ; | pr:call with the thing, but yet doth not |
declare the eſſence,yor come ins the de- | .
finition thereof. And of theſe heſayrh |
| alſo Top. bb, 5.cap. 1. T bey are proper- |
# | ties by themſelues alwayes, and doe [c- |
parate, and diftingwiſh from at other |
!
— OA ” on _
&@ ET 777 T9372
<a CC
—- ww
——
——_ On Om
—W
things.
Ml |
od
<Jy— CY
—
] The Art of Lygicke. 59 - |
| things, Porphyric allo doth diſtinguiſh |
and de'cribe thele arguments as Ars
ſtatle doth. A properis: (fauhhecap.g.)
us that nhich doth concerre wnto all
| onely, and alwayes. And againc,cap.g.
A property is that which is m the whole
| kende ro which it ts proper, and onety,
| and alwayes,ſo as, if that ſpecrall kinde
| be taken away, preently the properue |
thercof is taken away alſo. tid I bomas |
| | doth (o ſetoutthe natureotthisargu- !
| ment, that he giuesarea{on of all this | |
| | alledgedoutot Arifterie, and Porphy-!
rie. A thing proper Jayth he.1 p.q 97. |
art.1.44 52, 555t of the eſſence, but is ,
Cauſed by the eſſentsall principles of the
ecies. |
Ariſtotle, and Porphyrie grucs 1-:
ſtance of properties,in this ſentence.
He that 5 aptghnito latghing us 4 man.
He that 14 apt to learne Grammar 15 4
Wi In chus propoittion , aptnes vnto
laughing,and Grammar-lcarning, 15
| predicatcd of man: T his apenes flow - |
| cth from hisrcaſonable foulc, and chat X
| | 5 the principall thing in tus nature.
; Ifay
os — << eee.
f
#
u
!
TS]
.
—_w— PELIE - o —— -
| M—
1 25; 8
The Art of Logicke, ay
hs — CETOTON
[]
|
|
ſubieft, aud not cauſed by the eſſentiall |
I ſay it floweth therefrom, nor as a |
Conringent motion, bur as a naturall |
emanauon: therefore, this aptnes a- {
grees vm all men, onely, and al-
wayes. No man wants it, none but
man hath 1t, and all men haue t al-
waies, and conſequently it 1s proper
vnto man, and proper by it ſelt*, and
che nacurethcreot,and not inade pro-
per by any ourward<thcient, fo as1n
necetlary conſecuuon 1t 15 convertible
with man: we may truly argue thus,
It man, then apt ynto Grammwar skall,
IF apr vato Grammar kill, then
man. |
An accident ſayth Ariftotle, Top.
(55. 1.cap.g is netther defynition, Genus,
nor 4 properiie, andis inthe thing : but
ſo a5 that it may be, and may uot be, in
one and the ſame thing Mnd Porphyrie |
recites the ſame in his fifr Chapter ;
T hom alſo in the place laſt alledged,
doth ſo ſet out the nature of an acc1-
dent, that he giues allo a reaſon of A-
riſtotles Doarine: An accident (fayth
he) «s onely that, which is without the
A I ont
principle».
|
|
|
FB]
©” —
principles thereof, Now, this dorine
of Arsſtotle is certainely true: there»
fore we oughttoleaue Rem andfol-
tions, as the att of !ceing, iS proper to
ſiog roman ; The bearing of leaues,
proper, becaule they arc necellary c-
manations, from nature 1n the one,
and gracein the other: ſoas,when all
requiſite circumſtances be preſent, |
—_——
The Art of Logicke,
Þ!
low him, I ſay it 1s cercainly true, thar
there be ſomethings proper, that be
not accidents : namely, all natural] ac-
all living creatures:the act ot dilcour-
and truit to plants: and rhe outward
workes of holinctTe, vnto him that
hath the habit of holinetle, Thelc arc
man cannot bur ſee, and worke, the
plants cannot bur bring forth fruit, |
andleaues:wherefore,the holy Ghoſt |
doth chus reaſon ; |
He that doth ryghteouſneſſe is righ-
reowze 1. lohn, 3. 7.
Where the holy Ghoſt doth ne. |
cellarily loyne righteous attions, |
vnto a man that 1s habituaced with |
righteouſnetſe, as proper vio
him, |
|
0 CO A ACA te ty er OO EY FA Et 1 _ 4 FY _
Propertics |
- — -" "'—— - —— —_
— OO >= —— ——
— i — < y'Y
| % 25668" 0g
DS ——————
—— ——.
at. =
4
C\ W
ap
Os . « %
.
— o
ee re en OI - ,
= —_—
— - -
—
——
OO OO OO GAGE eeROAn—— OOO
The rt of Looicke,
| Properties be notadjunQs: for, ad-
units doe out wardly befall the ſubie(t:
and ſo much the word importeth,
' and Ram expretly athrmeth, Pro»
' perties doe not outwardly befall the
ſubica : but,they are necetlary ema-
nations troincheprinciplesof nature;
Heat, andlight doc not outwardly
befall che Sunne, and fire: neuher
doth iwiumming of timber in the wa-
| ter,outwardly betall the ſame:& ſuch
is thecondinion of properties,
Tothis ſcat or place of arguments,
the other ſeven, fet downe by Ari-
ſtole, muſt be referred: viz. Ynants- |
tie, Dmalitie, Relation, Where, When, |
The place, To #nioy, For, all of them |
doc outwardly betall the ſubicR, and |
are not cauſed by the principles of na-
ture ; asalictle labour will thew z for,
Lnantitie imports no more, but
Geometricall meaſure, or Arithmety | |
call number, @walitie lignifies the |
manner, how a thing exilterh,or wor- '
keth. Relation is no more, but the re-
ference, or reſpe& ot one thing to
— —— _— —
proctner, Where importeth the gene- |
rall '
—
IST
”
- .
. .
” . v*
þ ;
—- DOG —
The Art of Logicke,
— —_ -—— _ —_——_——
-— > ——— —— — —
rall place, wherein the lubicR is,as in |
this, or thar Country, #hen expref. |
ſeth the time, and duration, as this
|
|
|
:
7
|
|
|
|
there is in them, to bing the knows-
ledge of the ſubie, that receiues
yeare,this moneth,&c. The p/acelig-
nifies the particular place, as this
ſtoole, this chayre, &c. To mis) (igni- |
fies all indowm:nts, as Honour, Ri- ;
ches, Clothes, &c |
Some man ( perhaps) will require
me to ſet out the n1ture of quanciae, |
and the reſt : and alledge Ariftortes |
auchortie forfr, I anſwer, chat ought |
not to be done 1n this place ; tor, thac
belongs to other Arts,asto Geometry,
Arithmerticke, nacurall and morall
Philoſophy. This place r:quires no
more, but that I ſhew, what force
chem, into our vnderſtanding ; and
chat I haue done partly alrcadic, and
will make it more plaine, and jull by
that which followes.
P orpbyrie,cap. 5 [eparableza ſleepe to
dividean ) a mas.
accident into Yinſeparable;as black-
neſſetoa Crow.
_|__And Rewas followes him. 4-
63 |
”
N
?
|
$8.
"
Ag.
ll. At am. ANA. —
—_————— _
| i
RO
LY
OE OO CPI
th.
_—.
Boas
_ OI T. _
n oe _ 1
. ot Hf 5 - | >
y 4 2 " G Fo "*-
"oh 8.
UP + TORT 4 et IG BY EA ee. er, A CAC aInEes.....-4
The Art of Logicke,
| perties doe not outwardly befall the
| Properties be not adjunRts: for, ad- [-
units doe out wardly befall the ſubiett:
and ſo much the word importeth,
' and Ram Cxpreily athirmeth, Pro-
ſubiea : bur,they are necetary cma-
nations fromcheprinciplesof nature;
Heat, andlight doc not outwardly
| ter,outwardly bctall the ſame:& ſuch
|befall che Sunne, and fire: neither
doth {wimming of timber in the wa-
is thecondinion of propertics,
| Tothis ſcat or place of arguments,
the other ſeven, {ex downe by Ari-
ſtetle, muſt be referred: viz. Puanti
tie, D nalitic, Relation, Where, When, |
The place, To snioy, For, all of them |
doc outwardly betall che ſubieR, and
are not cauſed by the principles of na- |
ture ; asa lite labour will thew ; for,
Dnantitie imports no mote, bur |
Geometricall mca{ure, or Arithmety - |
call number. © ualitie lignifies the p
manner,how a thing exilterh,or wor-
keth. Relation is no more, but the re-
ferencc, or reſpe& ot one thing to |
——
_ —_—
— — — ——
pr, Where importeth the genes |
rall
— ”
The Art of Logicke.
rall place, whercin the lubieR 18,45 in
this, or that Country, When expreſ-
ſeth the time, and duration, as this
nifics the particular place, as this
ſtoole, this chayre, &c. To mio) ligni-
| fies all indowments, as Honour, Ri-
| ches, Clothes, &c
Some man ( perhaps) will require
me to ſet ont che nature of quancine,
and the reſt : and alledge Ariftortes
authoritie forfr, I anſwer, that ought
not to be done in this place ; for, that
belongsto other Arrs,asto Geometry,
Arithmeticke, nacurall and morall
Philoſophy. This place r<quires no
more, but that I ſhew, what force
there is in them, to bring the know-
ledge of the ſubie, that receiues
them, into our vnderſtanding ;z and
chat Thaue done partly alreadic, and
| will make it more plaine, and jull by
| that which follows.
'P e.cap.5 C /eparablezas [lcepe to
Flere] 8 453. ſeq
&cident into inſeparable;as black:
neſſetoa Crow.
And Rawns tollowes tum, OA-
_
63
Cn
F
|
{
yeare,this moneth,&c. The p/ace lig- |
'
|
——————
_—
— ll. ee
—.—
_—_—
|
">> bo OE ED
0 WARS os
7 bY = " I
# . K£ 'T944 $4...
236
The Art of Logicke.
fion 1s vſefull : for, the holy Ghoſt
doth vie it 3 from vnſeparable acci-
| dents he dothargue thus, Jer. 13.23.
| The e/Ethoptan 8annot change hu thin,
eAriſtotle hath not this diviſion z
yetit may be allowed, becaule, it 15
rue, and victull,Blacknes to a Crow
isan accident: for, a white Crow, 1s
no letTe a Crow then x blacke one,
it 1s inſeparable by Gods appoint-
ment, Wee may truly ſay, this div1-
nor the Leopard by ſpots, no more can
he leaxe by ſinne, that ts accuſtomed to
doe evill.
Separable accidentsare alway of lin-
gular vſe,and doe aboundantly {crue,
co lead our vnderſtandings into the
knowledg ofthe ſubiefts, vnto which
they are attributed, If we take them as
chey arein themſclues, and 1n that
coniun&tion which is beween them
and the ſubie&, then they are bur
light, and of {mall torce to ſet our the
thing we know not: but becauſe ma-
ny of them doc mect together in one
ſubieR, therfore their number toge-
ther makes amendsfor their weaknes
| ſeverally:
wt.
—
——
| I. Sans. 17:4 5+ 6, cc. Then came
| ment, that we doe certainly and di-
Rf The Art of Logicke,
ſeverally : yer, nane ofthem are fo
weake ſeverally, burthatchey doe cer-
tainly leade vs to know the outward
qualric, and ag; wade
ie, for learning, Riches, beauric,
Ne doe vndoubcedly arguetheirſub-
ie&ts to be learned, rich, and beautiful
and therby we know the condition,
which the ſubic& that receverh)
chem doth inioy,and how they differ
from others, that want riches, learn-
ing, or beauty: therefore, the holy
Ghoſtdoth fo often vie this kinde of
argument, and then njſt chicfly,
when he would ſer our his moſt be-
loved obic. By chis argumene theſ
ſpouſe 15deſcribed: Can.5.10.11.13
My louc ir whiteyuddie &c. By this
argument allo, Goliath is fer -
bh. DA. —_— "amd 4
wer xewed Goliath of Gath, &c. T
conclude, ſuch force is in this argu-
ſtinly knowtherby, one man from
another,and what reuerence, honor,
and reſpeRought to be giuen torthis;]
rather then to that: and thus 4rifto-|
| Rt | | th
— er treat - —
—
F
; :
: x
n
PY 1 ? I : j
Ky 1
'Y l
"4 4
f P
|
» j
3 |
#
f
"a ?
fs
—m_—_
The Art of Logicke , ;
f
;
—
je ſelfe is evident, there is nothing
| this differs nothing from that, and
| ſpecially, becauſe they haue a reaſo-
re doth. vrge it Top.lib. 1. cap. 5 ad-
SENGANTRY ANTE). te.
Thus are wecometo-an end of all |
che . politiue conſenting arguments: |
and. thatwe may conclude them all
toyntly, wearc to know,that hitherto |
is robe referred all hinde of unitie or
$dentstie: I (hall notnecede ro beitow |
much labour to ſhew it ; forthe thing
wherein one man can be the ſame |
with another, vnles it be in things |
elſentiall, or without the ellence.: Ir |
is aruled caſe in the Schooles, Two
things are the ſame Generally, Special-
hy, Nunerically , Tops 16.1. cap. 7. but
both of chem containe an yndoubted
muth 2 Two men are the ſame gene-
rally, becauſe both. of zhem haue-a
living ſoule, two men are the ſame
nable ſoule,boch of them are one nu -
merically, becauſe each of them haue
a bodic, fl:(h, and bones. Two men
are the ſame 1n riches, health, &c, be-
cauſe they are both rich, and in |
health, "2
— Hb.”
—
ST WT WS » he mp Js —_——
OO —
| The Art of Logiche.
--Inthenexc place y we come. w il
ening argument 4 |
Of. Diverſe irher TIRE
| ww diſſenting argumbile x that
( whichdiſentcth from mo thing'
it argueth. 6 226 © Yo
t 6 SIS! #1143 bis ; {FL 5) Ay.
R A nv hah wh: out
of Ars fotte; to Dijfts (Hy yth Por |
phyrie') in' a onimon ſock; Wt bg move,
uy by' a vatietie' to be + "ahwe
wayes or other't"'fo as, athi [4 + xd |
asffer after this ſort Fow it /elfſe, or
fron evoched6 ne ve finds this Ab-
ſtarce hereof my by 94 ApHe.” "
Top.'uh, t« (ap: — oa
Diſſent Ley word 4rmport:'
BY e _— of thoſe :'ati jets
_ belong to this plate; dn& they *
6 very fitly be ſo calleg, beeaulſe
thenacofdhen derh ragteethetvn
E 2 Dillenteth
oO X11. o :
Ts.
'1
p
3
['
,
}
}
J
MM?
Ie
j
1
RA40H5,
I,
_ [anddiſting arguments: As riches is
k barre, chat comes betweene a ric |
enerall nature of all che ar-
rs Ehich belong tothus place,
(I fay)the _—_— nature,becau ſe ar»
one: andirt (ignifictha diſtency, ari-
ih pratean: as Prophyrie hath
| things
dit: for, we {ay thoſe
diſtant cach from other,
The Art "of Logicke. \
1 Texterb ) This word &
| beg nes
mentsdoe diſſent more waies then
_ ever by a ſpace, or ſome
bodily ſubſtance that is berweene
them: aud this ſpace
variouſnes thatis betweene ſcuerall,
man and pouertie:by reaſon whereoF
dilſenceth — him th-a
$9596
Frome the thing it _ ] T
FRE. > aalaas o of this — Hay
namely,the ſubic& and ohe ed: cate
che argumen
_ Duc oronmp ben. ya : Hoa
yemuder «agus a n— 15 Gee, by
reaſon ofthat diſtance, or variation, |
15thevaricue, or |
hs ariſeth from hin, Sicknes
—
_ ——
doth |
M—
_
| knowledge is true, when we vnder-
|
| of him,therfore ſaith Porphyrie. chap,
_ 4
The Ayt of Logicke,
69
——_—
doth make ſucha difference in alick| =
man from himthat hath health, that,
thathcalth canno wayes be affirmed
3- Every difference makes 4 thing v@-
rious, when us ioyned therewnto,
Thele kindes of arguments ſcrue
to refell error, and the ve, is very
needfull. To know what athing is,
hath che firſt placc,andto know what
a thing isnor, oughtto hauec the ſe-
cond : for, by the one our knowledge
15 begun, and by che other oug know-
ledge 1s confirmed ; we are ſure our
ſtand chat the thing is no otherchen as
we know it, from whence alſo ic tol-
lowes = theſe argumenes belong to
ick,ſccing we may be truly ſaid to
et what x.) knew Ho when wee
areconfirmed in our knowledge.
Tocondude, when wee ſay theſe
ments doe lcadevs tothe know-
ce of the ſubiet, we meane, the
| roger notthe elſence thereof z They
what maner of thing it is: not of
what narure jt is: ſo ſayth Fdriforle
5.
|
pe III
yz TS
FR ha , «Wor " Wes j "&--. - ry Rq. ” i. 1 _ —_ ” : 4b is ; - N *, on
YO TE MOR TO COT er ay
6 « : ">, J « s # . 3 »% 4 . G *TE 2 . \ of IN - : Þ. . —_ 4a "437 EH . ;
: is
po & . wm Ts 'S o A
The. Art of: Logicke.
Top. bb., 6. caps 6.\Evuny difference
(layth he i declares after what manner
| | arhing is. We ſhallſe thetruth here-
A ; | of in the particulars following ; and
| | ' | thus much ſhall ſuffice, touching dif.
| - [ſenting arguments in generall, _ ..
.
"
F -
_—————__—_——
—— SV % OY
( Þ HEIBST:- 151 of 1: C divers,
iS Ramns, | Diſſenring arguments are,
is | bg | oppohits.
« * —_ EE
7 . «ES Wo 4 $A
- -# Pe
T- gt 34 —_ 7-0.
wx vo 1 o© = A, .
OO OY. - *- 8 5 4 «4 >
f Ii & EF This precept divideth ditſenting |
”- IS ; | arguments, intothar feverall kindes,
; | Ram did notinvent. ut 3 Porphyrie,| *
Wi | | cap. 3, bath it plainely ; Difference :
ti'J Hr, is by accident, or by it ſeife :
"and Ariſtotle hath, the ſame thing
plaine enough, Top. lib, 6.cap. 6.Con-
/iderare, &c. But more plancly, Top.
tb, x. cap, 3.6. where he makes
diftancy of arguments ro.be ſome great,
Av ſome [mal], Wee (ball ſhew'the ſence
we [ 1/28 { hereof, when we come to the parti-
"4
- 2 y Ea
20 Ines
—
—— — — — — — "_
F, iek i' | | | culats, | aq} "1 is 1
8 || | | Arguments that be dovers, are (wh
S. I Bama. | wo As diſagree.in ſome re/pett oncly.. |
|
| | |
Br |; '| 7: We haug.chis precept (alſo) in A»
|
{
—_— L
LM 'Y
hn
.*
Pry
—_—_——
BEA. oF
Porphirie )
FO q wm
"# - *;
2 Dy q ,
Fg ® | 1 So. ww
Lot? \ © ” .
,
_ ” 4 AWD 5
y :
ABER aan id teu w
| The Art of Logiche.
Porphyrie) cape 3. Ts that which is not
eſſentiall nor makes the things that auf- |
fer, to be another : but divers. And A-
r1ffotle implies the ſame un both the
places laſt alledged, In Top.6. cap. 6.)
( he ſaith) a difference by accident 111m, |
and is not in, the thing from which ut |
differs: thactore (according tohim)
their difference ſtandeth in fome rc-
{pc&onely, In Top. 4ib. 1.cap. 16, he
ſheweth chat difference which he ſaith |
is ſmall, 1n chic example of ſence and
{cience, Now all men know that the
difference berweene theſe two, isre-
{pc&tiuc onely,nor [umply,andreally.
Ariſtotle giues inſtance of theſe ar-
guments 1a . Tuſtice and-Forritude,
prudence and temperance, Top.lib,t.
cap. 16, Now, theſe doe differ, bes |
cauſe we conceite this man that hath;
che one, differs from him that hath |
nacchat; but anpher:they differfrom |
the ſubic& whigh they argue; bur in | :
me redpe& ogely, namely,chrough.
the; preſerit,-condition-rhereof; be- 1
Caulethe (ubieh znioycth oncotthem:!
buenos theralt}/.v. Þ- - 1 41 15k
' 230M F 4 I make
by
*
Bb”.
i;
4 ,”
*
T he Art of Logicke, _
I make it manifelt by this ſentence: |
Socrates ug temperate, but not inſt,
nor prudent,
Here, fuſtice andprudence dilcnt
from Sotrates, onely,in reſpect of his
pm condition , and becauſe he
them not: this diſagreement that
15 berweeneche ſubicRt, and the pre-
dicate, viz, Man, and prudence,
makes a diverlitic berweene them,
and no more, For,a uſt may may al-
ſo be prudent, and a prudent man is
—_— man, from hitn that 1s
I ET
We hauc examples of theſe argu-
ments very often, we ſay in our |
hip Proverbc, This man is at ods wth
bis wits z and we meane by it,hus wit,
and he differs, onely, becauſe he
wanltS If. ; My
In chefame ſortic isfayd, |
ſes was ſayre, but wot eloquent.
Lun doquancs differs from j/-
—c
ſer, oncly,in reſpeR, that he hair
not:for,otherwiſe it agreed with him
no le{ſerhen beantiey he mighthave
beene the one, as well as the other,
nor-
—
A Ee ee ee Er rr.
_— —_
| felfe, and that ualitic,
The Art of Logicke,
poewith the nature of him. |
The vſe of this kinde of argument |
is very bchoofctull:for, hereby a man |
twiker tus error, that thinkes he
{ hath much gahen indeed e hath bur
lictle: Thus the holy Ghoſt arguerh |
againſt che Church of Pergamas, Re
vel. 2.13. 13-14.20d x5
Although thou boldeft /af my Name
in the time of perſecution, yet thou
haſt many faufts ; for thou entertas
neſt the dofrines Balan, and the
Nicolatans.
So he aguah che Church of Thy-
atira, in the 15, 20. and 21, Verſes,
And chus much ſhall ſuthce touchung
_— chat differ from theſubie&t,
which they axepredicated,aftcr he,
manner of div;rliae, and in forac _
(pc onely.
l
þ
:
|
Crmar.
bs
*
-
—-
Le... ee. ee 2 - CD
a———_ _
The Art of Logicke,
|
Cln.ar...AS1
© Of Oppoſites.
Oppoſites are diſſenting arguments,
which whoty diſagree.
E haue thus ſentence in Ar
fotle, Top. lib. l. Caps 16.
The difference ( ſayth he ) which us in
thoſe arguments that be farre diſtant,
* | or different 18 very conſpicuous, This of
Ariflotle, and that of Kam arcthe |
ſame: for, by farre diſtant,. Ariſtorle
and by conſpicuitic in difference, he.
can vnderſtand no lelle, then an op-.
politionthat is made ly 05 <4 oe
ry way : for chat oppolt *A isindeed
conſpicuous: we _ de. it wil
little labour,and wdge of it with great
certaintie,
thongs, asarc ſet againlt each other,
* | holy diſagree] That 1s, both ye-
| |
[þriucy becauſe the ſubieft doth
want
can mcaue no other .but 0 © mg .
c
|
[ Oppoſites | This word (ignificsſuch |
GO. ad a— 4 - my . P - _—
er —_—
Et —————
Ws Ir TORE” "of
A.
—— —___—————
} we hauc examples hereof in ſuch ſay-
i =
|
The Art of Lovicke.
want the ching that dilleareth.; and |
really, becauſcrhe ſubie&t,catmot re-
cemethe thing chat ditlenterh;:When |
che ſubic&, and the thing ditſenung, |
doth abhorre each other, ang are ( as |
weſay ) incompatible, then there 1s
a totall oppuliyon berweene them: |
ings asthele be :
He that ts rich, 1s not poere.
.» He that is un health, ts not (che. "Y
I fay the namwrc of oppolites s
foundin theſe, c, notin thoſe wherein
man barcly, and (imply is ſubic&cd :
tor ditſent 15. in the qualitie not the
quidditie, orbeing of che ſubict : as |
hath beeneſhewed, 2, Povertic and |
ficknes agreesto man barely,and (im- | |
ply raken, aiid ſothey doenot oppoſe.
him ac All: thereaxforr why povertie, |
and (icknelle arc opp! olitevncs 2 imam
chat is rich, and i, heakhg is becaule |
riches ,andpovpriic areof that nature
ey ie canngt defall ie ſame ſub- '
TED reſpects Patr,”and
ercfore, whenlogver one of
mis aftirmed,ahe-adact is chereby
war BPNL........_ SP >
75
——— — —
— — — -— — ——C— ——
2,
-
The art of Lygicke, =
-
__——— mon $—_—
Catepor.cap.1o. luſt intheſame
TY
denied. Thus much of oppolites in
encrall ; in the nexe place, [muſt ſer
nethe{peciall kindes of them,
Cuay, XIII.
Of the diſtribution of Oppoſites,
Riftetle doth divide tes,
doth in theſe
| agreeable vnco them both ; in theſe
| c In this diviſion,
——_— . = wk berweene
in che ſame reſpett, part, and cime,
[ TO then
—
| The Art of Logicke.”
_ Thomas doth divide oppolices,
De veriate, q- 28, art, G. in C0Y.
Oppofits import 4 poſotive na
= op ner
ure 3 | C Comradifte-
in one, onety, «) ries.
Provatines.
Flr ey. bac —_—_—
e thing, the explicauon of the pat-
Gans will eee ey Ince
manner of ſpeaking, pe(we
ER rodela
ments that be predicated : bur that
ſeemes to be di ble vnto the |
definition of dilſenting arguments in
generall, cap, 1 2. I anſwer, oppolition
1sſo placed indeed; yet this diviſion
diſagrees not from that definition:for,
_ may be vnderſtood two waycs,
ccable to that definition 1n
| both.If they ſpeake ofthe predicates,
incaſe . ps A ps
the other denicd of the fame ſubic,
|
&
CO
|
. The Art of Ligicke.
then chey agree wholy withthacde-
Gnition 5; tor, then that predicate
which 1s denied, dorh- oppoſe the
thing argued: andI thinkethat theſe
authors meant thug : for, they know
that the predicates themſclues cor-
taine neither truth; nor falſhood, and
cheretore no oppoſition. Itthey ſpeake
of the predicates themſclues, not at-
tributed to ſome ſubieR, then they
giuethem the foundation of oppolt-
tion, and not formall, and atuall op-
polition: and therefore, they agree
tully with thardefinition, andtruth:
with thar definition: for, it doth ſup-
poſe, that the formdation of formall,
and atuall oppoſition is tn the'pre-
dicates themlſelues : and: they agree |
with truth”? for, it is moſt-certane, |
thatthe predicates themſehues are the |
- [foundation of formall;and4Auall op- |
poſition : by reaſon they*are of that |
narure, thatif one be atrtibuted, the |
reſt cannot, as is truely'delivered by |
Rem in this point of oppoſites: And |
Altaco, in 1. ſent. 9. 2. it. H. evenas
the dore when it 1s ſhut, debarres all '
entrance: |
m_— ——
|
j
The Art of Logicke.
_— — — —
entrance 7 and an armour of proof!
ellsthe buller. Now, I haueclce-
m. this doubt, I proceed toletout the
nattre of the particulars,
CA DEER
C::4t4a 2, 'X V. L
of Diſgarass.
[ Diſparars] This word pmpengh
iequalitie, and therefore ir may
ſeeme vnhe.for this place 3 yet 1t 1s
duely placed, for thereby we vnder-
ſtand ag incqualitie,not 1n the quan-
tcie,or force of oppoliuon, as it theſe
oppolites did: opppie, forme more,
and ſomeleile ; but of number, and
therfore, thoſe oppoſites which beare
| this tide, are thusdefined,
Di/parates are oppoſitest,oue of which
' #5 alike oppoſed, to many.
|
Ariſtotle cals thelc oppolites by hs
name of Centreries,anddoth (ctrhcm
our by theſe propergies: 1. They may
|#r, and not my in the ſubieft, 2. 4
third.
—_— OC _——_— er eo |
— DD ——
— _—
Ra745.
—
The art of Logicke. | |
third thing comes in the meane, or mi”
dle betweene them. 3. This third, er
ther per takesof beth the oppoſites, or 19
of it (clfe,and partakgs of neither, Now
it isplayne both Arifforle, and Remns
doe [pcake of one kind of oppolites 3
for, both of them doe inftance the
oppolices they ſpeake of in one and
the ſame example 3; viz, black and
white, It we apply thar inſtance vnto
them both, weſhallſee that they dif-
agree not x. Theſe colours are oppolite
z. They may be, and not be, in che
fame fubic&. 3. They haue a third
thing that comes berweene chem: as
greene, red, and all ocher colours. 4;
Theſe midlc colours doe partake of
black,and whute. 5. cach one ofthem
15 alike, or cqually © tothe reſt;
2 man may cruly (ay, he that is blacke,
15 not red, nor grecne &c: and fo of
the reſt, 6, many doc oppoſe one:
for, he that is any one 4 wad 15 de-
nicd to be all che reſt, |
Aviftetle doth allo inſtance theſc
oppalitesin good, and bad: andthere-
by their nacure is fidly reſembled: for,
—
cm tt
Experience EY M
jw —_—.
_ \ —
—
_— | |! % C-
—_
ww, oy
yz © mRAW vo
> bas T5 > 03" W Oh, ws TY 6: ny % wm 2 3zTE
F
E_ The Art of Logicke,
81
experience cels vs, that berwecne
good, and bad attions there be ſome,
which be both good, and bad : and;
cheretore, they partake of both the
oppolites. There is alſo, a cetlation
or omnu{1on of ation, and that comes
berweene them both, and partakesof
neither, Thomas giues thele oppolites;
4 poſitine nature, ſometimes in both,
and ſometimes but in one; and doth
inſtance the firſt in blacke, and whreey
and we might inſtance the ſecond, in
good, andev1ll,
Thus we ſee theſe auchors conſpire
in one, every one of them brings' a
parc, andall. of them-togerher dor
make a tull,and compleat expoſition
of the thing in hand.
The vic of this argument 1s very
ncedfull, and comes often, we finde
it in the word of God :The holy
Ghoſt doth argue che Church oi Lao
ment, thog art ( laythhec) wretched,
miſerable, poore, blinds, and nated: |
therefore, thoy art not rich,nor increa-
aleventh propertie, viz; They wmpor
dicea, Revel. 3.17. with. this argu-
ſea
—_—
———
>” u———T er ORE Cw Ron ws v8" HF T7
—T ,
:
The Art of _ =
I.
——
ſed wh goods, mor needeſ} not
Wce come to Relaries,
C:.u 4s XV IL
> Of Relatives.
| \
Relatives ave affirms
the one whereef conſiſts
ail relatson to the orber.
Ee finde this precept dcli.
VV Amotle in the
Io. of bis ( ategories 3 Thoſe av-
gament: (layth he) which are oppoſed
4 £ teins the one oppoſe us refer-
red to the other mutually : and Thomas
delivers the ſame thing, when ( ſayth!
he rp. 9-28. art. 2. in cor.) Thongs ave
[poken relatinely, then a certaze relats-
on, or reference of one oppoſite, 10 an0-
ther us d.
[ Relartaes | This word 1
( outr aries,
the mutn-
pon arercferred the one tothe |
_other
— _
——
| The Art of Logicke.
other, Relatives ( fayth Thoma: 1.p.
9. 28. art. 1. cor. ) doe ſrgmifie accor-
_ their proper nature, onely, a re-
pe of one og to another,
[ 4 ffiraving ] This word is brought
to {et out vnto vs, that boch termes
oppoſed, doe comprehend poſitine
beings: Ariſtotle agrees with Rama
init, 1n the place alledged, when hee
ſayth, Thet, Relatin:s ( even ) in rhe
thing that they ave, be referred: (0 4l-
ſo, hee giues inſtance of relatine op-
to
42
——_—_—
A
polition 5n kwowledge, and the this
be knowne: and borh of them dor
nific politiue beings. And Thonpas
doth reach the ſame hing, asI haue
ſhewed inthe 14. Chapter. |
|
| im relative oppolinon doe affirme,
Thomas doth reſolue this doubr, r.p.
9.28, on chis maner;
Foundation,
Relation.
In Relatizes
there © thee
Relatives ore founted vpon either
G2 quetitly
} Theondy doubc is, what the terms |
"*
| Wy
” =
E
_ F
I ——
Rf » * - P , > .
— —— ————— DE em act _ _- —»—
NG
i ———
ITE:
3 _—_
EE » b0 - =
- YI pg
ef
* ” -— + IIS; 2 OC
a»
84
—_
-
| quantitie, or attion, and paſſion: my i
| ſubickt art. 2, in cor: OT things aſſiſtmg
The Art of Logicke, |
& cor. In this ſence, Relation doth
import an accidentall being in che
| outwardly affixed art. 2.incor, The
| proper nature of relation,confiſteth in 4 |
| re/pett of one thing to another, art. 1. '
ad 1, which reſpef doth after a ſort |
befall the thing related, in that it ter-
deth from ut (elfe into another art, 2. in
cor.
[ Contrarzes] That 15, one (ingle |
terme, doch oppoſe another (ingle |
terme. Arsftotle teacheth the ſame |
thing, when hee putteth knowledge, |
_———_—
and rhe thing tobe »e, as an 1N-,
ſtance of Relate oppolition. |
[ The one G&c.] Inthele words, the |
proper nature of Relative oppoliti-/
on isſer out: andthey import ſuch an}
| oppolition, as wherein the rerms op-|
poled doe mutually conſtirure cach.
other, Ariſtotle teacheth the lame,
when he aftrmeth, that the reyms op-
poſed bee mutually referred eachto o-
ther : and denies, that muruall refe-
rence to all other kinde of oppotites,
Thomas |
—_——— —
-
| — —
The Art of Logicke.
Themas alſo hath the ſame thing: Re- |
latines(taich he 1.p.9.42.a7.3.44 2.)
are together in nature,and onr vnder-
landing z, 1n a/much as, the one ts come-
prebended in the definition of the 0-
ther, whertore Rams concludeth mu-
ly in theſe words.
Becanſe of thu mutunll relation, Re-
latiues are ſayd to bee together wn
ratare, ſo that, be which perfeti-
ty knowes the ove, knoweth the 0-
ther alſo,
To conclude this point of Relatiue
oppolition, it may bee demanded,
whether all Relaciues be oppolits? I
| anſwere firſt; The foundation of Re»
latwes bee Adjubs, br Cauſes, and
effc&s: therefore; in chat reſpeR, no
relatiues are oppoſites. Secondly,the
proper nature of relation confifterh
onely in a reſpe&t, that one thing hath
vnto 2nother without it ſelfe, andfo
alſo no 1elatwues/are oppoſites: for
which cauſe, Ariftotle makes Rela-
tiwesto be conſenting arguments, as
| G 3 I haue
ee
” — : # -4 . IC
© £ , 4p 1 $4. "3 v | 0 | -
The Art of Logicke.
—C_
5 RD + —_——_ — it
Ras: oh * __ PE ” — ——_— —_—
—
Thixdly, The things comprehended
in the termes related, or referred, be
ſuch, chat, they agree not vnto the
ſame ſubieR,in theſamereſpe&t, part,
and time; and thus all relatues be op-
polites, Fourthly, The oppolition
that is betweene the termes related,
is made relatiuely, that is, each terme
oppoſcd hath a reſpe&t, and rclation,
| the one tothe other : ſo as, we con-
.ceiug the one 15aganſt the other,and
the one doth conſliture the other ,
\neither of them can be mthemlſclues,
nor knowne to vs, but by the one,
and the, other : yet when they are,
they oppoſe oneanother' z And thus,
all celatiues be oppoſites, This I ga-
ther from Tho. 1. p.q- 28. Relatines
(fath he )) Signifie @ certaine Relation
of one terme wnto its oppoſite, art. 2.1%
cor. T he nature of relation 14 areſpett
of one to another, according to which,
one thing 1s oppoſed unto another rela-
| tinely, art. 3. cor, Thus (I hope)this
doubt isfully cleercd.
We findethe nature of thee argu-
mentcs
[ haue ſhewed Chap. 3. foregoing, |
|
/
18 The Art of Leigrcke,
meestully layd openin this ſentence,
He that « Father to Socrates, us not
414 try,
Here.1 Father and Sonne areterms
referred the one ro the ocher,as things
that reſpe& oneanother, 2. This re-
ſpe —_ out of the one to the o-
er, the Father is a reſpe& that ten-;
deth vmo the Sonne, and the Sonne a
reſpe& that extendcth to the Farher,
3+ The termes related doe mumally
conſtitute one another, in their owne
ng,and our knowledgezthe Father
ge knowne to wr — the Sonne,
and theSonne is,& is knowne to be,
by the Father. 4. The foundation of
this relation is Paternity,and Filialitic:
now, Paternitic being referred vnto
Filialitie, we finde cau{e, and effeR: |
but Paternine beingreferred vnto the |
Father, isan adjunA: and Filialine 1s
an adjun& tothe Sonne. Thus farre
which they argue.g.The things com-.
prchended vnder theſe two termes
'canmot agree to the ſame fubic&, in |
Aint he
ſonne to Socrates m the ſame reſpeft,
chey both conſent with che ſubie | _
" POET $rtts MW 48
The Art of Lopicke.
—_—
the ſane reſpe&,and time; fo as,now
we findethem oppolites:no man can
be Fathcr, and Sonne in the ſame re-
ſpeR, and at the {ame time, 6. Wee
Fnde the{etermes of Father, and Son
oppoted relatiuely, (thatis) in what |
ſort the one doth relpe&t the other, in
that ſort it 1s reicrred, as ynto its op-
polite; but fo as, one terme makes
the other to bein it ſclfe, and our
knowledge. 7, Theſe termes of Fa-
ther and Sonne be contrarics: for, as
Thomas layth, (ontrarietie 14 a diffe-
rence accorging tothe forme. 1. 24.4.
35: art. 3+ & 4. icor. And ſuch a|
difference there is berwecne Father,
and Sonne, Paternitic is formally one
thing, and Filialitie is formally ano-
ther, Theſamethungs are to be found
in many other examples, asin Prince,
and ſubie : Prieſt, and people: Ma-
ſter,and [ervaxt:Seller,and buyer &C.
But this ſhall ſufhice, as ſufficient to 0-
| pen the nature of relacue oppolition.
In thencxt place we muſt come to
adverlatiues,
CHAP.
JE
|
—_ JC —_
- — <<
—
LS EI
——
The Art of Loptcke.
Cnae, XVII. |
Of Adven ſatines. |
— —
Adverſatinesare affirming C ontrarier,
which are alwayes dyetty oppoſite
each to other.
Riftatle teacherh the ſame thing *
rouching the nature of theſe op-
polirs, (though his words ſeemedifte-
rent } he ſayh of rhem thus; Thoſe
arguments which be ſo contrarie, that
one of thew muſt of neceſſitie be inthe
[wbieT that can receime them, they net-
ther ave referred the one to the other,
wor bane any third to come betweeue
then. *
[ (ontraries] Adverſatiues becon-
traries, becauſe one alone oppoſcth |
vnto one alone : this oppoſition 15
caught by Ariſtotle, when he layth,
One of theſe oppoſites is in the ſubtet?
that is fit to receine the ſame, and |
doth mſtance chem 1n pea and
ow YE
[ Alwajes) |
R amns,
_
- *
= " 2 x "RR a
YQq/
2 RY
—_ n þ. 2, A Ber - &.
7 41*-\f> v , LF FW Lad '
les” ring CH ER 7
Y kW - A » "7
w# r
oy -
i"*\
5
. pn
"CERA
Oe SET |
The Art of Logicke. WEE |
which follow, doe ſerout the ſpecall
( Alwaer ] This wordand thereſt
nature of thele oppolits: and by them
wevnderſtand what theſe oppolices
be, and how they differ fromall 0-
thers. Thus word lignifics the contt-
nuance, and perperuitie of oppolit-
onthat 1s berweene theſe oppolites,
namely,that it ceaſethnotat any time:
becaulc (as Ariſidele ſayth) wo /abieft
that is capable hereof can poſſibly be
without one of them:now, in this they
differ from Diſparates, andrelariues ;
tor, every ſubic thatcan be blacke,
and white, may at ſome time be net-
ther of them ſo allo, a man may be
neither Father, nor Sonne, No Fa-
ther, when he hath no childe, and no
chulde when he hath no Father,
[ Dwe&h]This word importeth an
1010n that is without mixture,
incerpolition, or diverſ{ionzlike vnto a
ſtraight line that extendeth berweene |
ewo points, and this no doubt was 1n-
tended by Arifotle, when he ſayd,
Theſe oppoſes be without relation, or 4
third thing to come betweene thews.
Herein
| The Art of Logicke,
| Hercin theſe oppoſites differ from
Diſparas, and relatives, the one re-
ccues the incerpoling of athurd: and
che other admus a mixture of con-
{cnang, and thereby a diverlionfrom
haue all theſe particularslayd opento
finden Arsforle: namely,
He that t wm health, 11 not ſicke«
In this example we finde, 1. one
lideſer againſt another. 2. one polt
tive being is fer againſt another 3for,
ſo we conceiue ot ſicknes. 3, One of
theſe 1s true of a man alwayes : he.
cannot be bur [icke, or well ; becaule,
| the temper. of his bodie requares it,
and therefore chis oppolition 15 an
man alwayes, becauſe when he 1s
licke, ho is not well : and when he 13
well, he.isnot (icke. 4. There is no
third thing to come. baweene (ick-
nes, and health, 5, Sicknes 15 never
muxed. with health, nor healch with
| | ficknes.
— —
oppoling:by tharxclation, and reipettÞ
chat 6th hath co che ocher.. Wee |
vs, in that one inſtance which wee |
|
9L
—_—
—”* — la...
[92
Em
The Art of Logicke. |
ſicknes. 6. This oppolition 1s dire&t :
he that falls from health becomes pre-
ſently (icke:when licknes is expelled,
then . healch is preſently recovered:
the onedevours the other, and con-
| trariwiſe, the one overcomes the 0-
ther:like vnto two armies inthe field,
thelaſt morion in fighting oh the one
fide, isthe firſt motion in purſuiteon
the other (ide: this may ſuthce tor all
thoſe oppolites which doe containe
polite being in both terms.
WEE CE OE
C nu&Y XVIII.
+ Of Privatines,
N this Chapter and that which fol-
; lowes, wee muſt handle negatiue
contraries, |
Privatines ws negative Contrarics, |
the one whereof denies in that ſub-
81 ( onely) wherein the affirmative
1s by nature. |
That which is affirmed #1 called the
habit: |
_ —— ———
In
SC —
The art of Logicke. F 93
| babit ; that whica is denjed the pri-
Ualion, or Privatine.
Ae reachech the ſame things | ;
in the zexth C hapter of bas Cate: |
ories, Privation and habit univer/ally |
Laken ( ſaith hc) u/azd concerning one,
and the ſame thing namehy,that where- |
a nature requires that the habu ſhonid
be. Inthis we conceene the habit, and
the privation z To haxe the habit, an!
zo be deprived thereof, and theſe two
are not the ſame : for, both of them car- |
wot be attributed to the ſame thing,
Tobe deprived, aud to hane the babi |
are oppoſed as privation, and habe : |
for, aſter what ſort there #1 oppoſiticn
betweene the privation, ana habit, wn |
the ſame ſort to hawe the han, and is |
be deprived of the habit are oppoſed,, |
[ Privatives | T his is the name ,
of theſe oppolites: butit ſeemes not |
very hily given : for, itbclongs vas |
one member onely ; Ar:forle( as we |
lee) calsthis oppolition 4 prevation, |
and habit ; and Thomeasr,an oppolition | |
according to privationgard babuids ve- |
PATE G, 2.8. art. Gaincor, | Nega-
— IIS = —- — ”— _ —— -—— — — ———— - —
A — et eee
Qq /
ant | ts aaa 4 4 ad
On
The Art of Logicke,
[ Negatine contraries ] Theſe op-
polices be vnhitly called negariue, be-
cauſe onely one of them 15 negate.
Thomas ( inthe placcalleadged)doth
expretle the ſame thing more ficly :
| Some oppoſites ( ſayth he) are ſuch as
one onely imports acetaine natures
the reſt no more but the removing, or
negation of that natre affirmed. CON-
'rrancs they may bee called: becauſe
one 15 oppoſed ro one, but not pros |
perly , tor the negation of a forme
S4
hath no torme,
[The one whereof, c.]Thelc words
and the reſigdoe ſer out the nature
theſe oppolites, and placeththe ſame |
intheſe properties : x, The one de- |
nyes,thc ocher affirmes, ( that is) the |
one hath a politiue being,called a ha- !
bir, the other the abſence of chat ha-
bic, called a privanon, or priuatiue.
2. This habit, andprivacion is oppo-
ſed, notthe one againſt the other, ab-
ſtrafted from rheu ſubje&:butas the
one 1s received by the ſubre&; ſo che
other is ſubſtrated cherfirom, 3. This
|
,
[
ſubjc& whercabours they arc exetci-
»
— a_ —
=
.
pu —_—— _
-
=
-—— — _ Jy
UE ——
| ſed, 15 one and che fame :
The Art of Logicke.
95
even that
ſubicR, and no other is deprived that
hath coneived the hab. 4 T hat ub-
ic whercabout theſe oppoſites are
y
| cxcrcted, 15 not every one vmverſal-
ty; bur onely that wherein the habx
ought to be according to the courle
of nacure.
The reaſon why theſe oppdlites
muſt be exerciſed about ſuch a ſub-
zedt 13; becauſe nothung can traely be
faydto 'bed deprived, vnletie the thing
| which is remoued, be due hereto by
nature, The reaſon why, to hauethe
habit, and to be deprived thereof, are
oppoled, is becaule the habit and prt-
vation thereot,cannot befallthe ſame
lubie&,1 mn the ſame reſpec, pant, and
ume,
Allchde particulars are declaredin
that one inftance Which e47i/otle
giues, viz.
He that ſeeth, s not blind, or depri-
ved of fight.
In this ſentence we finde, x. Two
—_— ——_——_
——
— —_—
|
pI _—
To” ROE Ig — =—_— -y _
I T_T Ce
I; LD 14 Ye bd
. * - A v A. 4 a ys - w_
RE...» - EP 2 _—_ .
P a” " + _ EE
-
= o- ” "x" £7 * bs of
+ Z V ; A! Tx - #44 + os 4 s *" " l bo]
ts £7 = £ = --” * Y WE 4+ 5 * « ” K," 0 4
4 he . a thefax; 8
0
The Art of Logicke.
—
nd ———
-
terms, viz, light, and blindnellc.
2, The one 1mportsa politiue being,
the other che abfence of that being.
3- The one 1saffirmed, the other de-
nied,cherctore one is oppoſed to one,
4. The things chemiclues abſtracted
tro the ſubje& are not oppoſed,
bur ther oppoliti6 1s exerciſed about
one ſubic{t. 5, One of the terms 1s
due vnto the ſubie& wherein they
oppole, v4z. [ight 1s due ro mans na-
ture : tor God made him a ſeeing
creature. 6, The foundation of chat
oppoſition is in ſight, and blindnelle,
m chemſclues abſtracted trom cheir
fubic& :; we deny blindnes vnto the
ſame man that hath ſight : becauſe
mans bodie is not capable of them
both rogcther , in the ſame reſpeR,
part, and time, And here ] put an
end, to the oppolition of habit and
vation,
—
97
Ts The Art of Logicke.
Cuar XIX,
Of Contradifories.
ontradiflories,are negative Contra
ries, the one whereof denieth every|
where, or generally.
( ontradsion((aith Aliaco 1.ſent.
q- 5-18. M.) « the moſt manife[i
repwgnancy that is, the affirmarion of
One, and negalien of the ſame : and this
& donble, the one i of propeſiticns, the
other of terms: when as a fixite rermve is
! place ſpeaks of the laſt noc ofthe farſt,
Some oppojues (layth Thomas ) de ve«
rite q. 28. art. G, wn cor. doe aſvwes|
| Cert abne narnere in one part, the other t. & |
anegalion of the ſame, and ihe/c are op-
pofites according to affirmation, and ne+
gation.
| Ariftotle doth teachtheſamethings
[ moſt fully ; ,L Comradiftion ( (ayth
| he) « 4s oppoſition which by u ſelfe
' wanteth « meane, or middle betweene
H them: |
|
|
et
oppoſed unto an znfintte terme. [ his -<
Rammns,
x —_
Lt 4 — _ _— hy
4
The Art of Logicke, pl
them: Poſter.lib. 1. cap. 2. Principuns
ante &c, And he doth explicate this
thing further;{@tegoy.cap.10. /d guo-
que. That oppoſitvon (laych he ) rhat
falleth under affirmation,aud negation,
54 not affirmation, and negation belong
ing to this place : bur the 1"4ngs which
fall vnder affirmation, and negation,
awd r11cje doe oppo/e the one the other,
| 4s affirmation, and negation; for, there
is the ſame manner of oppoſition in theſe,
as m them, even as a t10n, and ne-
gation are oppoſed, when we ſay, he ſit-
reth, he ſuteth not. So alſd the things
ſmbiefted in both thoſe [entences are op-
poſed, namely, toſit, not to ſit,
[ Contradittories ] T his word is the
name of this kinde of oppoſition, and
lignifies properly two ſentences web
pronounce againſt each other, butin
this place it 1s vſed to ſet out things
which are ſubje&ed vnto ſuchſenten-
ces, or doetall vnder afftirmation.and
negation, and they may belo applt-
ed; becauſe, ſuch things dc e oppoſe
cachother no letTenaturally, and vai-
verlally thenſentences doe;andthere-
by
PT
|
[
| |
|
|
ck ———————
' | may becailed Contraries, becauſe one
\andin all ſubjetts, ſo as, theſc oppo-
—
—_
The Art of Lopicke.
by they are the toundaton ot the' -afs
firmation, and negation in {entences,
[ Negative Contraries | One parc of
ee Contradiftion is negauue : they
ee
doth oppole vnto one,
[T he one demeth every wheve, Theſe
words doe place the nature' of Con-
radiRorics intheje properties, They
concainea denial|, that is, the abſence
of a politue nature, athrmed m the
one, isimplyed, or. vertually ayou-
ched in the other, 2. This deniall is
made by one onely.th« other alwaics
contayning a polite nature, 2. This
deniall is made yniverfally :: tor all
times, and re/pc&s,and every where ; |
{1100s containe alwayes a truth mn
them, whether Socrates be, or be not,
one of them 15alwayes true, and the
other falſe: wheretore it is proper to
the oppoſition of this kſnde, tharone
| of them is true, or falle : as Ariſtotle
hath truly obſcrved in the tenth chap-
|
ter of bis Categories, And the reaſon |
of iris good, all chings that haue any
I 3 being,
CNY —
| 100
CO
|
being, mult cither continue, or dil-
continue 1n that being: from whence
It is,that, Ariſtotle layth, that this op=
poſition is made by ut ſelfe, and wants |
tbe intermiſſion of 4 third:tor no pow- |
er can put athird thing berweenebe-
ing, and not being, nor cauſe that ;
thing not to be which is in che ſame
reſpec and time, when and as it 15,
nor make thar to be which 1s notan |
thac reſpe&t, and during that time
where 1t is not,
e Ariſtotle and Abaco giue vs (WO CX-
amples in the places alledged, that
doe fully repreſencthe natureot theſe
oppolites, |
He that fitteth, doth not, not ſit.
He that is a man, 1s not, 4 not man. |
The Art of Legiche. |
Wee haue in theſe ewo ſcntences,
rwo terms, viz, 7o ſit, net to ſit. A:
wan, 4 not mas, The firſt of theie]
terms comprehends a poſitiue, and fi-
ce nature: inthe ſecond, a negation,
or abſence of that politiue nature,(by
aterme infinite, and vnlinutred)1s1m-
plicd, |
e—_—_—— ——
| The Art of Logiche,
plied, Thefirlt is affirmed of a ma
the ſecond is denied ofthe ſame man,
3. This deniall extends to all tunes,
and reſpeAs, wherein thatftirmation
may be conceived, 4. Thisdeniall is
not voluntary, nor impoſed : bur, ari-
ſcth (imply, andabſolucdy fromthe
nature of the things themſelues: no
power can make him that 1s a man,
not to be a' man, during the time
while he is a man, Neither' can any
power make that a man which 1s noc
a man, during the time wherein he
is nota man. 5, It 1s alwayes true,
or falſe of this, or that ſingular man,
that eicher he is, or thathe'Is not,
there can be no third moment aſlig-
ned, wherein he neither 15, nor isnot,
Soas with this I may put an end to
Contradifory oppoſition, and the
| explication of all politiue — "Ml
both Conſenting, and Di cntng.
NM; CHAP.
%
|
xi 264 ;
© ; , .
XS
The Art of Lopicke,
Rammns.
[ (omparatine er gementrgare theſe ar-
t Ariſlatle delivers the doArine of
| compared. Secondly, they are argu-
CEEXX
fv oF 4 /
| Of Compariſon 1n generall. |
Ow we muſt come to compara- |
. tue Arguments,
|
|
|
j
SAMments that are compared toge- |
ther. |
theſe arguments, fully, and plainely
cnough, as we ſhall ſee anon,
[ Comparatize ] Theſe Arguments
'are oppo vnto policiue, and there-
force, they haue a ſenſe oppolite to
them,
doe ſer aut the [peciall nature of theſe
arguments: they arc called Compara-
tive, becauſe they are compared with
other things z and this nature conf1-
ſtcth in two things : Firſt, they are
ments, by meanes of that comparing,
4'Q npeud together ] Thele words
Things
Es ee Tr_— — —
*
4
The Art of Ligicke,
Things are compared together when |
che one 15 meaſured, waighed, or de-
ciphered by the other; T hus camber
is compared with the rule ; wares are
comparcd with the waights, andthe
picture withthe thing pictured: and|
f thus we vnderſtand the word Compa- |
redin this place. Alingle terme 4 =.
comes a compared argument,” when
it hath ſuchatorce to argue,orſer out
the ſubie&, as 1s recemed from ano-
— Þ] cher thing, thatic 15 compared with-
all; and herein, theſe arguments hauec <
an oppolite nature vnto polkme: for,
they borrow no force to argue trom |
the qualicic, or quantitie of any other
arguments.
Thele arguments haue theſe foure | .
properties, 1.T hey are equally knowne) |
(char is) the wo things compared, |
haue in themſelues no prioricie, or |
anteccdency,to argue,and be argued:
as we finde in the effe, and cauſes
thereof: Inthe fubieR, and che pro-
pertics, and accidents annexed there-
Unto, 2. { Songe mew doe know the one
better then the ther. That is, inthe | |
| H 4 event,! oY
|
Tow emammppGgnT— — S
Cr
The Art of Logicke,
| event, byreaſon they arc acqu ainted
with the one,and not with the other,
2. | They ave taken ſometim:s, from
things faigned.) And ſo,they may well
be; tor, ſuch chings haue a being 1n
our vnderſtanding,and that is enough
to make them rationall beings ; as wee
learne from Thomas, I part. q.16,art.
3. ad 22, Thats enough allo,to ge
them a place in Logick : for every be- |
ing, as well rationall, as rcall 15 obiec-
ted thereunto, 4.[{ owpariſons taken
from famed things doe arpuecs ard ſet
ou! the ſubieft. Becauſe, theforce that
all compariſons haueto arguc,ariſerh
fromthe apprehen(ionof our vndcr-
ſtanding z and not from any-reall re-
lation,or conſent that the one hath to
the other,
Now, becguſe the Reader might
know,how to findea Compariſon in
a Diſcourſe, wee muſt vnderſtand,
that, ſometimes they &e ſer ont by cer-
taine words, which axe proper to them :
and ſometimes they lie open in ſentences
that ave fit to expreſſe them : In thu
caſe the firſt ſemtence us called the propo-
——
.
£
|
| Of th: Diſtribution of compariſon,
. | divides it rmto equall, and vnequall, |
|
————————
The Art of Logicke.
lo5
ſition : the ſecond the redduion ; there- |
fore, when he findes them, he needs
no other dire&ion ; Sometimes alſo, |
they are ſet downe withous notes, or |
markes ; avd the parts are inyerted, or |
contrafted:thenthe matter n(elfe muſt |
dire hin, Theſe are all, that belong | |
co compariſons in common,
ICED EC ET ACC
BO E We > is ©
} Equall. |
» Quantitie, Greater
ap” Rs
Comp art 'e Leſſer,
fon 14 jn
L ike,
Qualities
Vultke. |
AX Reſtetle hath every branch ofthis
di
viion; In his Categories! tn the
ſxt Chapter, he placerh Compariſon,
In quantitie, as propa thereto: 2nd |
In che 8. Chapter, heplaceth Com-
pariſon |
The Art of Logicke, wth
Ramns.
I,
ought to vnderftand what quantitie |
pariſon 1n qualitic, and doth aiyide 3t
srto like, and vnlive, and makes thus
kinde of Compartſon, to be, found
onely in qualitie. Laſtly, cap.6, At ho-
rum Cc. andcup. 7. Onma vero, he
divides unequall mio greater .andieſſe :
and the things themſchues, rhat theſe
ewo Auchors bring, are received in
the Schooles of all ages z therefore, I
will proceed tothe particulars,
Caaye, AXIL
Of Equalitze.
Duantitie u that by which things Com
pared are ſayd to be ſo great, or ſo
lute,
Riſtotle doth teach the ſame |
thing: Top. lib. 1.cap. 9. Ex bis, '
&c. Dnantitie, layth he, importeth
m1tude.
[ .2uentitie) In the firſt place, we | .
is!
O— — ———
\ The art of Ligicke,
_
is, elle we ſhall not vnderſtand, what
is meant by a Compariſon 1n quan-
uitie,
{ That which &c | Thele wordsfer
out the nature ot quancitie, and place
tina magnitude z for, according to
magnitude, things are ſayd to be
greater,or letſer : now, magnitude 15
not taken here Geometrically,nor A-
rithmetically : bur, in a larger tenſe:
even, for every magauude,by which |
athing may be {ayd to be thus, or lo
much: whether 1c be ipoken of bo-
dies, number, or vertucs : of things |
reall, or intelleuall: tor, ch1» Legsch |
requires; becauſe ic hath codoe with |
allchings, wherein our vndcrttanding |
hath any thing to doe, |
—
the ſame quantitie. |
One in quantitie makes equall ; ſo
fayth Okars 1. ff. 19. 9. 1«4it. B, o-
prxio. 1, I doc not finde this ſentence |
- | 12 Ariftorle exprelly ; yer he awplics
chus much, as weeſhall ſee when we |
come
wo
Theſe things are equall, that haue | Rains.
|
.
_
EE ee eng
.
The Art of Lovicke. |
— —-
| COmre to the Compariſon of likenes,
chap. 25, And no man thinkes ather-
wates,therefore went cſtecmethis |
ſencence to be a precept of Art.
\ Thoſe things are equali] That 1s,
ewo things layd together,be ot equall |
quantitie, or magnitude,
[Which hane the ſame quartitie. |
That 1s, which are adzquate in mag-
mtude : as when two lines be ot the
ſame length,the one isneither longer
nor ſhorcer then the other: when nei-
ther end of the ſcale waighes downe |
che other: when two numbers agree
together, as, two and two ; toure and
fourc; for, thus every magnitude 13 |
one in quantitie, Now, we have the
nature of Equals defined,and er ou:
vato vs, we muſt know how to inde
and vie them,
The markes,aud fgnes of eqi1/itie are
theſe 5 vitzOne. Eqeall, Armuch,
pariſon z bur not proper tothein : for,
many|
—
——_—_——
As and So, denyall of incqualiztre,
As and So, be ſignes of this com: | |
w—_—©otzys OO .c. 0&9 wn © _ >». a a oa od hand dh 7,
|
|
| #5 more or teſſe : and I finde the ſame
| cheſe marks, or (ignes, namely z
The Art of Logicke, bs
many times they are found in com-
pariſon of likenes, I doe not finde
that Ariſtorle, or other Schooles,doe
thus punAually ſhew vs how to finde
outthele compariſons, onely, I finde
that Thomas layth 3. p. qu 42. art. I
1 cor, Then a thing ts ſayato be equall,
when 1 denyed, to be vnequall, that
thing in eHsſtorle Meta lib. 10, text
I 5. 16. from whence we may inferre
their agreement with Okaz, that
placeth che cquallitie of things, in
being one in quancnne.
We haue examples wherein com-
pariſons of equallue are fer out by
1» Both the Cheraubes were of one
meaſare; 8 Kings.6.25.
2+ Thou haſt made them equall to
vi: CMat.l20.12.
'3« Sinners lend to ſonerstoveceine
4s much agame ; Luke 6. 3 4.
4+ The length of the Cutie is as large
as the breadth : Revel. 21,16.
3. 1 cannot doe eſſe, or more then |
Gods word commands :; Namb.21.18..
GeTe \
\A
o
——_
The Art of Logicke,
6. Te ave not inferior to other C hur-
iches:2.Cor. 12.13.
Someume the Propoſition and
Reddiuon are diſtinAly ſer downe,
7. Abu part ws, that goeth tothe
batile, ſo ſpall bis part bee, that ter
eth by the i:wffe : 1.5 am. 30. 3.4.
8. How much ſvee hath glorified
her [elfe, and lived deliciouſly, ſo much
torment, and ſorrow Live ber : Revet-
IS. 7,
In theſe examples, wee finde two
Cherubes to bee one in dimenſion,
Two Labourers, one in wages. A
lender, anda borrower onein quan-
ritie of money. The length -and
breadch of the Citiconein meaſure,
The Corinths and ocher Churches
onein grace,&c, They that wentto |
warre, and they that guarded the |
ſtuffe, one in the quanntie of prey. |
The Whore of Babylons delights, |
and forrowes one in extent. P.y this
we ſce how to finde out fuch com-
pariſons, asare marked out ynto vs.
pariſons that want thoſe (1gnes, or
markes, viz. What |
On ne
I will alfoſet downe ſome coms- |-
The Art of Logicke.
III
— — — —_ -
— —— —
What force vertne hath ts hayps-
wes, that force vice hath tocurſednes.
The Jlewes anſwered, wee can not
tell, Chriſt anſwered nether tell I you.
AMat. 21.23. |
In the firſt, Vice and vertye, are
' one in cfhicacice. In the ſccond,Chriſt
and the Iewes,arc one in {tlence. By
this we may know how to-finde our
theſe compariſons.
Now I will ſhew how we ſhould
vſcthem, tor, hitherto we inde them
compariſons, but noarguments, be-
| cauſe thus farrethey are wholy deftt-
ruteof relation to any ſubiect, inthis
quantirie, the one ſcts out theother,
and no more: but cvery argument
leads vs to know ſomeſubieCt, which
we knew not, Iwill ſhew their vſe,
by one of the examples,(and Ithinke
that willfufhce ) on this maner.
The Whore of Babylon hath ſor-
| FOWEes,
In this ſentence, the word /orrow
doch leade vs to vnderſtand what the
Whoreof Babylon is: viz:in her c-
ſtate or condition, Now, bxcaule tome
man *
aA
— —_
pI
———
The artof Legicke.
R imns.
| man doth not know the quanaitie of
chis forrow:bur doth know the quan-
uuc of her delight : therefore, her
{orrowW 1s layd to her dclight, and
thereby hee comes to know what is
the quaarine of her ſorrow, in as
much, as, ſhee is one in the quanrinie
of both, By this I hope the Reader
will inde the way how to make vſc
of ali comparariue arguments, ſo as,
I ſhallnorneede to doethe likein a-
ny of the reſt which follow,
CR RR
x4 7. XXIIL
of 4 nequales,
Unequall things are thoſe which
IP. 9.41. art.1.in cor. Vnequals
(ſaych he ) cavner be one in numerical
azentitie: and thus much Ariſtotle
haxc not the ſame quantitie. |
7) the ſame effc& ſpeaks Thomas |
thoſe
_—____.
wt —_—
—
>—— _
and Okham ipeake : becauſe,chey make |
A905 ne Wy 7 Av »
that: More then: Much move.
The Art of Logicke.
| thoſ c things equal], which b be one 1n|
uancitic, |
T his definition hath nothing in it
|
tobe expounded: for, that 1s Gone)
alreadie in the definition of quantite,
Cap. 22, |
The preater #s that, the quantitie,
whereof doth excerde.
The termesot this definition, _—
be vnderitood by that which 1s paſt,|
inthe laſt Chapter. ">
T he proper markes of this Coinpi-
riſon, arcluch astheſe:
Not onely, but atſo, Rather this, then
Examples of cheſc Compariſoris,
are theſe which follow,
I am readies, not to be bound onety:
bat alſo,to dye for the name of the Lord
| Leſws. AR 21.13
[ had rather be a davihoeper' in Gods
honſe, then dwell in the tents of withed-
nes. Pſal. $4.10
The Lord hearth the gates of Sion,
wore then-all the dwellings of Iacob.
Pſal, 82. 2.
If, when wee were enemics z wee were
2s
Ramus,
re
—
hh ——_—_—_—
—_—
am Fg X R j
oy %...3 l P. 5; 2} tl 4 £5, _—_ ws MY in bo RY oy %
F< , -C _ 7H FS oe OA a &
- *%. P / 4 > a” kV *» * *
JD
The Art of Logicke.
reconciled to God, by the death of bis
onne : much more, being reconciled, we
ſhall be ſaved by hs life. Rom, 5.6. 7. |
In theſe examples, we haue theſe
Compariſons. Ts be bound,and to dye, |
doe diffcr in the quantitic of bitter-
nes, & this iS eſteemed to exceed that.
Tokeepe 4 dore,and to dwell inthetents
| &c, are layd together, and this pre-
ferred before char, in mans judge-
ment, as exceeding in the quanuue of
excellency.The gates of Sion,are com-
pared withthe other dwellings of 1/r4-
e{l,in the quantitie of glory,and loue-
lines, and theſe preferred before that.
The reconciling of an enemy, and the
ſaving of a friend, are compared inthe
quantirie of difficulue,and thatis jud-
gedtioexcell this.
In ch:ſe Compariſons, the greater
15 brought to ſer out the 1cler, to the
end,that the leile may ſet out and de-
clare che ſubic, or thing argued:
and the holy Ghoſt himſclfe hath
ſhewed vs how to doe it, for in the
laſt of the examples, he doth reaſon
ths 5
Us
Js / a
-
The Art of Logicke.
5 |
If Chriſts death reconciled an enemie,
then bis life will ſawe the reconci-
led.
The reaſon of this conſequence is
this, viz. (Inthe judgement of man)
the firſt is more difhcult then the ſe-
cond. It is a hard thing to reconcile
an encmic;for,then,the whole worke
is to doe : But not fo hardto fauc a
ſalvation. Inthe ſame ſort, David ar-
gues : If 1 lone to awell m Gods boxſe,
rather then in mans texts ; then my af-
eftion 1s exceeding fervent thereto:
for, manstents ( inthe judgement of
man)exceed Gods houle for outward
plealure, and profit;and after this ſort
we may argue from the reſt.
nn” I ICE
friend for, luch a one is next dore to |
—
The Art of Logicke.
|
Cuae, XXIIII
Of the Leſſe.
The leſſe, is that, the quantitie
whereof is exceeded,
| Shall not need to explicate, and a-
vow this definition 3 tor, that 1s
done enough alreache, inthe ewo for-
mer Chapters: therefore, I proceed
toler downe examples of it.
A ſtone ts heatne,and the ſand wargh-
fie, but a feoles wrath mere. heave
then them both, Pro. 27, 3.
T latoured more abundantly then they
all. 1 Cor, 15,10,
It us eaſter for a ( amellto gee through
the eye of a needle, then for a rich
man ts erier into the kingaome of
God, Luk. 18.25.
The Oxe knoweth his owner, and the
Aſe his Maiſters crib: But 1ſracll
doth not know, &+c. 112. 1. 3.
In theſe Inftances, the Companion
we ſecke for, 1s very apparent : A
—— —
—
, um -
ET \
ſtone
The Art of Logicke,
it”
fone and a ſooles wrath 1s Compared,
in the quantitie of waight: and that is
1 ſayd to beleiTe then this. Pavl and o-
thers are layd together in the quanti-
tie of Iabour, and he exceeds them.
The paſſing of a Camed through a nee-
Ales eye, and a rich mans going to hea-
ven, are compared together in the
_—_—_ of ditficuiric: and that is ir +
crior to this, The Oxe, and /ſrae{l ate |*
ſet together, in the quantitie of 1gno-
rance : and theſe are more blamed
chen they.
Theſe Compariſons doe argue the
greater, by the ietle, and they muſt
be framed thus : A fooles wrath a-
bounds in waight:for, the ſtones and
ſand are not ſo heavie as it, If 7(rael/
be ignorant of me, then their igno-
rance is exccfhue : for, the Oxc1n his
kinde is not fo ignorant : becauſe, he
knowes who owes him, and fecdes
him, fo doe not they, And thus much
tor Compariſon in quantitie,
I 3 Cnar.
The Art of Logicke,
C HEAP XXV.
Of Likeneſſe,
. | Now followeth Compariſon in qualitie,
whereby things are [ad to be /ucb or
ſach.
I Call a qualitie(ſayth Ariſtotle, Ca-
tegor. Cap. 8. \ that ,of which,things
are ſajd to be of this or that manner:
a qualitie muſt be reckoned amon
them Sbich are ye to be manifold, or
| of many ſorts.
Thot things are like which baxe the
[ame qualitie.
T hoſe are like ( ſayth Ariſtotle, meta.
i; one, One m qualitic makes thmgs to
be like, lo ſaythOkems. 1. diſt.19. 9-1.
Git. B. opinio 1, 1 will end with Gellona,
A _— ( faych he) &« an agreenvent
ma walitie, ib, 2. traf.5.cap.1, n*. 1,
rom hence wee may conclude,
thoſe chjngs be equall, which are one
lib. x. cap. 1 5.text. 20.) whoſe qualitie |
|
—
' that ( inthe ju _— of Ariftotle ) |_
in
<—
—
4
y
| RN T he Art of Logicke, q
in quantitie: becauſe, he makesthem
ro be like, which be one in qualicie:
and conſequencly,he placeth compa-
riſon in qualite in the ſamething =
Okam doth, whoſe judgement us al-
ledged. Chap. 22.
Ariſtotle doth explicatethe nature
of theſe Companions : Top. bib. 1.
cap. 17.Similitudes(layth he) muſt be
divers kmdes z Ov in theſe which are of
the ſame kinde. The firſt 11 after this
manner : 4s one thing is 1s one, ſo ane-
ther ts to another ; as for example, as
knowledge is to the thing knowne , [0
ſenſe ts ro the thing ſerſible, Agame,as
one 15 1 one, ſ0 another i in another : 2s
for example,as fpobe is inthe eye,/othe
mind is in the ſonle :2S,calmmes is inthe
Sea, ſocleernes is inthe ayre: and both
of them are quietneſſe. Wee hauc ex-
amples of the ſecond kinde,whenthe
ſecing, &c, in a man, a horſe, a dog:
for, how farre forth the ſame thing
. [1s 1n them, fo farre forth they are a-
Ike,
conſidered either in things which ave of
ſame qualitic j$1n many : as{melling,
|
-
I 4 Iwill
=
of Yu
—
Ry 9.
- — ©
=
The Art of Logicke,
Rams.
—_
—_—_— "—p—=_ wap oe mpererwedibe.. ou wc” CE Ee CS
_———— a — _—
I will content my lelte with the bare
allegation of Arstorles words: I (hall
not need tro compare them with Ra-
m4, nor lecke for their ſence : be-
cauſe, all chat Rams brings in this
Compariſon, 15 but: an explication,
and Comment of the words alledged:
what Ar:/torle delivers m briefe, Ra-
#14 Opens atlarge z therefore, I will
ſet downe what he [ayth,
The markes of likencs be theſe, v12z,
es, ttke, After rhe manner.
I willſhew examples of this Com-
pariſon, where the markes are obſer.
ved: as tolloweth,
Let ther that lone him, be as the
Swnne, [udg.g.21.
They ſaw his face as it bad beene the
face of an Angell. AQt.6,15.
The forme of the fourth i like the
ſonne of God, Dan. 3. 25.
Exeept yee be circuntciſed after the
warner of Moſer; AQc15.1-
Someriope the warke is left ont.
As inthis example, |
Cy ſiſter 5.4 garden imncloſed, my
ſpmſe a ſþrmg ſput vp, 4 fountame
ſealed, Cant, 4.13. ' Of
[ + I...
Fn.
The Art of Logicke,
—Ofthis kinde are all metaphors, or
borrowed words, they ( I ay ) con-
caine {imilitudes, as when Chriſt 1s |
called 4 rocke, 4 ſhepheard, a wme ; |
and God the Father an h1sbandman, |
For in them, Chrilt, and God che Fa- |
ther, are likencd vmo tho{e chings
which be vſually ſignified in thoſe
words. |
|
The parts of a ſamilitwde are ſometime |
layd ont at large : either ſevered, or |
wonned 3 45 when there are foure
termes dijimttly ſet downe.
Ramis.
Foure termes, are then found in a
full Compariſon, when chcre be two | 6»
in the Propolitzon, and rwo other in |
the Reddiuon, Theſe examples will
ſhew it. |
As the waxe melteth at the fires ſolet
the ungodly periſh, at the preſence of
Goda. Plal. 68. Z,
The cermes in the Propoficion arc
. - | Waxe, Fire ; in the Reddition wagod-
on Gods preſence,
As
|
The Art of Logicke,
Rayms,
| Ram.
— —- — - CC—
| fs the Hart brayeth aſter the Rivers
of Water, ſo panteth my ſoule aftcr
thee, O God, Plal, 42. 1.
The terms in this full Compariſon,
are theſe foure : The Hart, River,
Sowle, God. {
Sometime one of the markes is left
our, and the parts diſplaced,
Andchus we finde inthis example:
Hmibanas lone your wines, even 4s
Chriſt loved the Church, Ephel. 5,
29.
The termsin this Compariſon are,
Clrift, Church ; Huchandr, Wines.
T he Redditjon is ſet firit, the Propo-
{inon laſt, If we place it orderly, this
| 1$the frame of it; As Chriſt loucd the |
| Church, ſo muſt men loue cheir
wiucs,
Semeteme both markes are left ont,
And this inſtance (hewes it,
Silver, aroſe over-layd vypon a pot-
ſhewd: burmng lips, and an coil |
beart.Pro.26. 23» |
The Compariſon hes thus as 1 a
ver ; ſoare burnung lips, anda wic-
ked|,
£5
exrd, and drofle couered with | .
——_—.
CE ——————
_—
; The art of Logicke.
123 |
ked heart : fayre without, and foule
within, The toure terms are diſtin:
Droſſe, Silver ; burning {4ps, a wicked
heart,
A Continued ſimulurwde, is when the
ſecond terme, us to the third, as the
firſt xs to the ſecond. |
Thi example will make it fami-
_
As the Father hath lowed meſo hawe
] loned you. Tohn 1 5. 9.
In this ſimilirudc, there are but three
cerms. VIZ, Father, Cbrsſt, Dsiſcyplery
Chriſt,the {ccondcerme, 1s reterredto
chethurd rerine, Dy/ciples z lo the farit
terme Father,isreferred tothe ſecond
terme Chriſt
Here alſo one marke ſometimes 4 6-
mitted,
The words of our Saviour will ma-
nifeſt this ſentence,
| Ongbteſt not thon to hane had pitric
on thy fellow ſervant,” as { hadpittie
os thee, Mar. 18.33.
The three terms in this ſinulicude
arc theſe, Lord,Servant, Fellow : and
| it
|
|
Ramis.
Rams.
IO,
—
- ab
——_—_
*
pd 5" a
WA 5
. —————
| 124
<—
The Art of Logicke.
Rammus.
II,
It ought to haue this forme : As the
|Loed had pittie on thee : ſo thou
ſhouldelt haue had pittie on thy fel-
low.
Fained ſimilitudet are of as much force
to argue As IT AE.
And fo much we finde 1n Scrip-
eure: tor, Chriſt ſpake much in para-
bles, and all parables be [1militudes ta-
kentrom tained chings.I ſhould now
(according to my former courſe)ap-
ply the examples vnto their ſeverall
rules z bur I will ſpare that labour:
tor, the [inulitudes doe lye ſo plaine
in them, chat much labour will not
make them plamer, I may not ſhew
how thelc {1m1litudes doc arguethe
fubie&, and ingender truth ; tor, that
15nottheir othce, but Compariſons in
qualitic, doe onely make our know-
ledge more calle, and tamiliar.
This cxample will ſhew it.
The wicked are deſiroyed.
.
In this ſentence, deſtrufion is attrie
| bu-
| The Art of Logicke.
buted to wicked men : and thereby
we vnderſtand what condicon betalls
them. To make this knowledge more
ealic, and ſcnlible, rhe holy Ghoſt
doth compare them tothe ml ing of
Waxeyand thereby we tinde,that, 44
| condition betalls them ſecretly, cer-
| | tainly, vnrecoverably : tor, ſuchis che
| qualitie of melung waxe, that cagnot
ventcd trom melting nor recovered
againe when it is mcheed.
Ariſtotle ſeems toditter from Renee,
becauſc he maketh | militudes wſefull
be diſcerned how 1t melterh, nor pre.
edfent.
bas the, framing 3 Syogi/mere
Nefinryons,
To the firſt, becan/e by the induttion
of many particular hbexe ſſes, wee con-
clade the umwverſall. To the ſecong, be-
canſe we take 4s Confeſſed,as 1t 35 4n fuck
and ſuch,ſe it is m the thing in queſtion.
Tothe third, becauſe in Sumnliiudes the
termes are Compared together in ous
thing, that i1,common unto them :/ach
« thi jt 4 Genres, and & Gents ts 36+
quired 18 adefinition. Topdib.1.cap.18.
# ] aniwer, |
|
|
|
I2,
—_——— 4.4
-
The Art of F, ovicke,
Rams.
I,
| Tanſwer,] muſt nor (now ) decide
this doubt, becauſe the poine it ſelfe
doch not fit this place : for, che firſt
branch ſpcakes of things Compared.
Thethird,ofthe qualice wherein they
are comparedz and both of them be-
long co the matter of a Compariſon,
not to the formall nature thereof,
_ ſecond is a Compar! 4
itie ( if any at all) no
kkweſers and rhis I GE certaine,
therefore here I will end Compart-
ſons of likcnefle,
XXVI.
Cu avp.
Of Vnlike,
V unlike things, ave thoſe, which bane
4 drverſe qualitie.
Ee hauc little to ſay touching
this compariſon : for, the ex+
plication of compariſon in likenes,
doth ſufficiently ſer our, the nature of
-
—__.
WE Ds TINT o
— ——_
La wide Þ. 4 ws = #
cn W PS. 4
& *; .2-w>:ÞÞ »
——
The Art of Lopicke.
a compariſon of vnlikenes, I will
therefore adde examples of it, and
chat ſhall ſuffice; and in that alſo I will
content my {clte with chele which
follow.
The fourth beaſt, was wnlikg to «ll
the beaſts before it : Dan. 7.19.
There ts one glory of the Sunne, ane-
ther of the Moone, and another of the
Starres, for one Starre aiffereth from
axother in glory: 1. (or. 1 ms
Exod.g, 14.
But wot as the offence, (o is the yift:
Rom. 5.15. |
The Snrnne doth ſet, and riſe, Man
dies, and lines no more,
The things compared, and the
ualitie wherein they are vnlike: are
- | that,the Sane and Han, arc com-
ples, thar, I ſhould ſceme to loſe my
| labour, if I ſhould atempr co ſhew
them. The laſt is the moſt difficult,
| becauſe it wanteth the (ignes of this
compariſon, yet every man may ſce,
pared together, in the qualitie of dy-
There ts none like mee tn all the earth: |
| locafie co bee found in thele cxam-.
ing:
ll.
—_—
—_— — — — — — ——
The Art of Logicke.
|
|
—__———
Ing: the Saxne dycs by ſetting, and re-
vives by riting, man dyes, but revives
no more,
The vſeof theſe difſimilicudes, 15
allo tound1n this laſt inſtance, where
every (ingular man 1s ſet out by his
ſubie&ion rodeath z as a qualitie of
| his being : now, although chis pre-
dication be truly made in the '1udge-
ment of all men: (for none will deny
that man 1s ſubic& co death) yet
our knowledge hereof is furthered
when the truth 15 vufolded, and made
more ealte: for that end, theſe com-
pariſons of likenes, and vnlikenes
are brought: we doe then more rea-
dily concetue what death js to 1nan,
when wee ſec 1t1s vnlike the death of
the ſunne, that revives, ſo doch not
man, Thus thatI haue ſayd ( I hope)
is ſufficient to ſhew the nature, and
vſc of linnlitudes, and difſimilitudes :
and therefore here I will end che mat-
cer of comparatiue arguments z and
all thoſe which be predicatcd onely,
CHAD.
|
_—
|
The Art of Logtcke,
Of the Genus and Species.
choſe arguments which bce ſome-
times predicated, and tometumes (ub-
|
tained in tiys parc of Lepick ; asI haue
ſhewed in the third Chapt forego-
ing, |
The arguments of thus kinde, arc
called the /econd ſabſtaxce : conlitting
inthe Genzs and Species: aS1 allo de-
clared in the place alleadged. In the
Cuan SXAVIEL |
I this place wee muſt ſer downe,|
ieced: for, thats the lait ching con-
handling hereof, wee mutt firſt fer
downe their nature, Secondly, how
they be predicated, and how l{ubiec-
tcd, Tinrdly,we nutt ſhewthat thy |
'
|
g
be alecond (ſubſtance,
The Genus ts that whole, that us eſ-
ſ[entia(l 10 the parts. -
And thus fayth Ar;ſtetle too, The
Genns ( layth Perphyricy { ap. 2.)
K
s
R4 FUHLS, |
ee — —————— @<———
— —
ns —
The Art of Logicke,
1s @ certaine whole : yea (2s Okams
ſayra x,44/, 8. 9-4. 4t, D. & E.) Tbe
onus importeth the whole thing : not, |
; Rap it doth partake of all the ſpe-
aficall differences: for then z one and
the ſame thing ſhould partake of cow |
traries ; which may not be granted, in |
the indgement of Ariſtotle. eta, h:b.2.
(4.12.text. 42+ But becan/e ut us |
4% eſſence commun vnt0 man): as ihe
ſame Ariſtotle teachetb ; Top. 6b.1.
( 4p. 48. ad definitiones, Cap. 5. Pro-
priuw vero & Porplyrie, Cap. 2.
DB nod ctians. And « whole not de
as Thomas thinketh : 1. 4ſt. 25. 4.1.
wh, Io ad. 2”,
-2
The Specieris a part of the Genus.
Porphbyrie, and Ariftorle doe ſpeake
to the lame purpoſe; 4 Speczes (ſayth
Porphyrie ) i placed under the Genus,
4; & thing that tc eſſentiall thereto. cap.
2, Explicam iggar. And yet more
plainly,inthe ſame Chapter. Contine-
txr iguur. The Species ts beth a whole, \'
vntso /
aud « part: @ part yuro ancther(thatss) | |
Ow WW
\
The Art of Logicke, 13 =
[4h m_— the Genwe, fayth Ariftothe, cid. |
2 hb. y. cap 24+ text. 30. 4 whole not |
. wnio another, bus wm others : becauſe ut
is 4 whole tn the parts,
The generali 1s ether ſnpreame, or tn- | Ramns,
fertor, The ſpecial 1s euber middle-
4 | moſt, or loweſp |
2 | The ſupreame Gen, & that which
1-7 ( bath no Genns abowe #.
The wmferior Genus, is that which us
inferior 10 one, and ſuperior ts ano-
ther.
| The loweſt ſpecier, is they which cave | 1
{ #4 be drided into ether ſpecia{ls. -
| .
A {
{ Weehauc allthis in Porphyrie, and |
cus he wriceth in the ſecond Chap- |
ter alleaged. Is every Category there El
be ſeme things that be moſt general, 3-4
and others To &e woſt ſpecial ;, aud | ( I
5 ' betweene theſe, there be (ome that are
b both general, apd [peciall, That i meſt
| generall,unto which there can be ne [#-
perier Genus. That is waſh ſpeciall, un-
' |Bo which there can be no other Species
" 5 uferior, Betweene ihe moſt generally [
g of OHM and} _. Fn
— — —— _ —__ —_
*%, ft RO TI 1x IR WIR... 8 G7
4 : " x.
FI
ET” ———y
” # PEO TIP FR 7 DIR; Arn, <a n9ne 2s
I «5, LEIF 89 |
hs
F
—— —_—
_ — ”
_ - ©
4
T52 ; The Art ' of Logicke. | w
| | ud the moſt ſpeciall 3 There be others,
| | | which the ſelfe ſame thing, 15bcth Ge-|
' nns and Species, being referred ſome
Willy while to one thing, and otherwhile to k
Þ | |. b | another : as for example; a $ ubſtance |
| | is a Genus, and vader that, there i a |
b of Ti header: rand onder a bodie,' an autmated-
die © and wider an antmated bedie, a
tiving (reatwre 3 and wnder a living © |
{reatwre, a rationall Irymg Creature :
(Unaer that 4 (ingnlar man. Of all theſe, |
p Jubſtance us moſt generall,becauſe it u |
\a Genus oncly, A manis the moſt ſpe- |
{ ct2ll, becauſe it 11 a Species onely: but a
| bore, 11 a Species of ſubftance, and a
\ Gents vnto an animated boay. An ani- |
wiared body, is a Species of « body ; A- |
gaific, Aa Irving Creature, 1 a Species
onto an animted body : and Genns wn-
| gee reaſonable lromg Creature : but 4
| |reaſe onabie lining Creature, 1s the Ge-
nus ff a Wan. And fo much for the na»
| rurEof the Geng and Specues.
-# Wee muſt now thew, how the
Genus, and Species, sſubie&tcd,and
predicated : for, that is the ſecond
thing we vndertooke. Ariſtotle doth
| that, |
—_iTT
—
fy
The Art of Logicke.
835
chat, partly inchefourth booke of his|
Topickes, the firlt and ſecond Chap-|
ters:and partly, but morefully, inthe
fitth Chapcer of his ( ategeries, where
he proceedeth thus ; The Gewns ts at»
tributed unto all, andevery the Species,
that are contained wnaer the ſame.
The Species is ſubiefted to the Genns,
the Genus 11 predicated both of the Spe-
cies, and the indrviduall: the Species us
predicated of the indrviduall, Thus
farre Ariſtotle. Wee may make this
familiar co our 'ynderftanding , by
theſe examples:
A $1493 183 4 liying Create.
Peter 15 A Man.
In the firſt, wing Creatures a Ge-
| Nu, viz. of realonable, and vnreaſo-
nablc Creatures, A man, is a {pecies :
becauſe it 15one kinde of living Crea-
| (re, Living Creature, Is attributed to
| man: the Genus to thagSpecies, In
the ſecond, Petey 15 an individual) :
Camas a {pccics, and thereby weſee
that the ſpecics 1s predicated of thein-
K 3 divi-
bm
CLI re —_—_—
REI = > - _ -
.
—— —_ ——. —
=
'N
- owt a A Ir eo OR —_ I <a R
%
zo ——
——_——_ —_——_y
»
.
The Art of Logicke.
/)
Fr l
Of
-
|
and the moſt ſpectall ; There be others,
| ctell, becanſe it 11 a Species onely: but a
| bogie, 11 a Species of ſubftance, and 4
\| Gexiis onto an animated boay. An ani |
| cure; of the Genys and Sprcees.
1&5
0115 [bodic: and vnder a bodie,' an aumated-
e | lroing (rearmre : and wnder a living |
(reatwre, arationall lrying Creature :
\onacr that a (rugnlar man. Of all theſe,
| = ff
j ſubſtance 14 moſt gemerall,becauſe it us
\a Gena oncly, A man is the moſt ſpe-
—— — \.
wiared body, tr a Species of a body : A+
gaitie, 4 Irving Creature, 11 a Species
enio an animited body : and Genns un-
toa reaſenable living Creature : but a
reaſonable liiting Creathre, is the Ge-
wes ff a Wan. And fo much for the na»
Wee muſt now thew, how the
Genus, and Species, 8ſubieftcd,and
predicated : for, that is the ſecond
thing we vndertooke, Aritorte doth
| har, |
mere
—_—
A"
-_
tributed unto all,and every the Species,
that are comtatned wnder the ſame. Y
The Species is ſubiefed to the Genus,
the Genus 11 predrcated both of the Spe- |
Ces, and the indrviduall: the Species is {
predicated of the individuall, T hus
farre Ariſtotle. Wee may make this |
familiar co our ynderftanding , by 1
theſe examples;
AH $248 15 4 ling Creatmnye.
Peter 15 4 Man,
| In the firſt, living Creatures a Ge- |
| NUS, viz. of realonable, and vnreaſo- =_
nable Creatures, A wan, is a {Pecies :
becauſe it 15one kinde of liviug Crea- I
| rure, Living Creature, iSattributed to |
| man: the Genus to thagSpecies, In |
the ſecond, Petey 14S an individual] : þ |
Cams a {pccics, and thereby welſee
that the ſpecics is predicated of the in-
K 3 divi-l
2645 3 4 ee 7h whe 4
. -A \ A + f
The Art of Logicke,
”
—
em,
;
dividuall;and conſequently, the Ge-
nus is predicated of the individuall al-
ſo: for, the Genus bath w» being but in
[ome ſþectes, 3S Thomas hath truly ob-
ſerved. 1.p.9. 15.471. 3.44 4, And
thethings themiclues do ſay no leile.
| If a man, then a living Creatare : ſce-
| ing every man 18 a living Creature,
By this ( I hope) iis plaine, chat the
ſpectes 15ſubje&ed,and both ſpecies,
and Genus are predicated.
Some man may doubt, whether the
Genus be not alwayes predicated,
and conſequently belongs tothoſe ar-
guments,that are alwayes predicated.
Lanſwer, the Genus(asitis a Genus)
is alwayes predicated,and ſo muſt be,
ynleile we will divert nature;bur that
Genus that is ſometimes a ſpecies, is
ſubiced : and may be fo, when it is
2 ſpecies, and that is enough to bring
the Genus vnto this place ; for, «
makes it ſometime predicate % _
time ſubieQgd. This example wi
ſhew that I anſwer truly,
{Hf lromyg Creatwvre, is 4 leving body,
able to mone it ſeife. _
——_—
—
_ CT apS! $7V-"Ivs \, 90-9
|
The Art of Ligicke.
" [039 6
A living ( reatare, 1$ a Genus of a
man: but a ſpecies of a /wving bodbe,
and it isſubie&ted in thetoreſayd pro-
poſition, A living body, is a Genus |
to a living Creature:tor, vnder thatis |
comprehended, the growing plants,
that increaſe:bur cannot moue them- |
ſclucs: as a living Creature that can
both waxe bigger, 2nd moue them-
ſelues al{o: new, this Genus is predi-
cated of a Iiving Creature: therefore,
wee may reſt atJured, that a Genus is
ſomermes predicated, ard ocher ſome
time ſubicRed,
The chird thing that we ſecke for 1s,
whether the Genus, and Species be a
ſecond fubſtanve, ,4r:/tothe Categor.
cap. 5. proues that chey are: on this |
mannet: They are a ſubſtance, becauſe
x. Fe may truely ſay they be ſomething.
2.T hey appert aine ts the effence of eve»
[#9 particular being. 3. They ave [nbiec-
ted vnto others, anal ther are predica-
1+2/ of thera:waich is propgy unto 4 ſub-|
flarde. They are 4 ſecond ſubſtance:
betau/e. 1. They ate Communicated to,
| w4ax9.2.T hey are predicated ſometime
ME th
'%
| Gs,
K4_ os
ll. —Cl—— Cn,
136
The Art of Logicke. TT
| and conſequently, they bane not the pro-
per nature of a ſubſtance : for that 11 al-
wayes ſubietted, in ſo mnch, as nothing
could exiff, but by reaſon of (ubſtance
properiy ſo call: d. |
T he ſpecics comes ncerer to a firlt
ſubſtance then the Genus : becauſe,
I. The ſpecies 1s 1n nature,and predi-
cation necrer to the1ndividuall, then
the Genus as a man 1s neercr Vnto
Peter, then a living Creature, 2. The
Genus, 1s Communicatcd to more
then the ſpecies, 3. T h: ſpecies, as it |
is a fpectcs,is ſubieed alwaiesto the
Gcnus: and it ſelfe neyer predicated z
burof che individuall, Theſe things
areevidcntin themſclues: therefore,
I necd not adde any proofes to con-
firme them, they are caſe, and open |}
ro our vnderitanding : therefore, I
will not ſtand to vafold them, If any |
require meto ſhew, how the Genus,
and ſpeciesdoe argue, and er out the
firſt ſubſtance, I] anſwer, thar, that re-
queſt 15 noriin yaine: becauſe ( as A-
riſtotle truely ſayth, in the fikt Chap-
ter of his Categories.) Al other things |
We
"—. — —
— —
s Mes aw wa
The Art of Logicke.
are predicated of the firſt ſubſtaxce: |
therefore sf the firſt /ub[farce were not, |
none of the reſt could be. Ver notwith- |
{tanding, this place doth not require |
me to ſhew it ; becauſe the 1nitances |
given alreadic,hauc done thatin part, |
andthe precepts of a defininon wyll
(hew 1 yet more, but they belong to
che ſecond part of Logicke, and may
not be brought hither, without 1n:u-
rie to nature, andour vnderſtanding.
I will (arisfie the demand fo tarreas
this place permits, and thus one ſen-
tence will doeit.
Peter uw a man. |
Herc, men is a ſpecies, becauſe 1t 13
bur one kinde of thing, comprehen-
ded vnder the name ot living Crea-
ture, The lowelt ſpecies, becauſe no
Creatures that haue different formall |
beings, are contained vnder it, Peter, |
ſ1gnifies4 firſt ſubſtance, becauſertim-
orteth athing that cannot be div1-
ded, otherwiſethen inco matter, and
forme ; w4z. his (oule and body : and |
they be in Perer,asina whole, not a3
na ſubic&;as welearne by Arforle,
(er
The Art of Logicke,
({ 4tegor. cap. 5. Porro ue nos &c. May
1sattribuced vnto this firit ſubſtance,
and thereby every luperiour Genus
15 attributed to it alſo : for, if a man
then 1. a living Creature, 2. Aliuely
body. 3. A body. 4. Alubſtance, and
conſequently , when wee atiribute
man vnto Peter, that goes not alone,
all cherdt goe with ir
I haue now (TIhope) ſatisfied the
demand, and ſhewed the force that
mae argurnents haue to argue the
it ſubſtance z and therefore, I am
come to an end,of all that belongs vn-
ro thoſe arguments, which be ſome-
cumes predicated, and ſometimes ſub-
reed: andtherewichall, I haue fini-
ſhed all that belongs, to the firſt part
of Logicke, inthe judgement of Ars-
ftatle, and the nature of the things
chemſclues, Rewws doth extend this
firſt part of Logiche further chen thus:
but vndoubtedly,he followes his own
y—_— againſt the aurhoritte
0
and the nature of the things chem-
ſelucs, In the next Chapter, I will ſer
all Zogicke Schooles before him; | |
Ly
- 4” >
yd
ec OD ore oor omits er nn OO OO OO
!
[
|
*
|
——
— — <> @- — x.
| —————
L ——
The Art of Logicke.
d downe, what he ſay > ad why I dil-
ſent from him ,and thereby glue atull
Concluſionto this part of Lopreke,
kl 5s SLATES
CnHae, XXVIII.
Of Coningates, Cc,
Conmgates.
eArguments that & )Notation.
riſe of the firfl, are Diſtribution,
Defnuion.
Theſe arguments bane the ſamse force
to argue, that the primitimes hancy |
from which they are derived,
TS preceprt, ſers out foure other |
ſcats of arguments, mere the |
Ariftaile ay uerh them place |
inthe firſt part of Lopicke, They bc- |
'ong ro Locicks, ſÞfare chis pre- |
is true; bur not to this place,arid |
| b fare it is falſe, I ſay, not to this
| ug hey eo
———_
,
:
Ra mms,
OT OO —ERS —_
—z
LOS
| 240
2,
| Rams himlelte, th ey belong toother
— — _ —
ſeats of arguments, namely, to them
chac he calls by the name of privatiue
although they did fo, yer can they
merits, according to the varictie t
Arguments;tor, (according ro him )
they hane the ſame force 10 argue that
the primitines haue, from which they
are derryed; theretore, they are the
ſame with chem, ſeeing the nature of
every argument ariſeth from its force
to argue: but the precepts of them are
alrcadicdiſpatched, and oughtnot to
berepeared againe,
co argue ariſeth notfirit, and ong1-
nally out of chemſeclues: but by re-
ro hauc herlight) andchat therefore
they ought to hauecheir owne pro-
per ſeates inthis Art. I anſwere firſt,
If any ſay,the force that theſe haue |
Heetion, (asthe Moone 1s concaved
)
they doc not argue by reflcEtion,
or any force received tiom others, as
the paruculars willſhew. Secondly,
challenge no new places : tor,it wee
ſhould multphe che (catcs of arg
l
our vnderſtanding doth apprehend |
ro
— _—
_—
The Art of Logicke.
—_—— —___— —
|
—
The Art of Logicke,
to bein them, then wee mutt haue
an endles( ac leait )a frunfcs number:
ſeeing it 1s in vaine tolert ten men to
| doe the labour of one,
| belong not co chis place ( inthe wdg-
' ment of Ar:ſ{cr/c)theretore common
vichach not giver; itthem, and con-
{equently, they ought not to have 1t;
; becauſe Art is approved by vie: and
{ſo much for them all 1oyntly.
Coningates are names aiverſly deri-
ved from the ſame b-ginmwxe.
| namely, vnto al/ thoſe that are of the
The forcſayd featcs of arguments,
|
Ariftotle doth giue the name of |
Conmnpates vito ſome arguments |
|
| ITO |
| ſame roote, Caſes oniugation, orrazke : |
4, Inſtice,luſt,lnſtly,Strength,S trongy
| name. In their nature they are no
| accidents. or properties,
| * becaule
Strongh, Top.lib. 2, cap. 9. thactore,
there 1s no difference rouching the
| more, bur either formall qualines,
Inflice in che abſtract, isnothing z if
we rcferre it to man, it is an accident;
BR amas,
—_— — ——
The Art of Logicke. £
nomunated,and conttiruted lt by ur,
Inſity, importeth an ation done ac-
cording to law ; and therefore, what
Juſtice sto man, that Tuſtly is to an
ation: Conftorimtie to Law may be
and not be un an ation, and being
there it doth denomurate, and conſit-
rutethe ation wit. Ariferle ( mthe
place laſt alledged) calls rbems Conin-
g4-r:becauſe when one of thews us proo-
/o to : theretore, he never meant to
make chem a ſcat of argumeis aunt
from hs cn,
Notation is the interpretation of «
Ariſtotle doth acknowledge, that
[ome words doe interpret the nature of
things and denominate the things thems-
ſale for, thus he writcth ; 7 boſe are
called denomwates, which bane the ep
pellation of a name from ſome other ;
bat ſo, as, they differ in 64/c, as from
as: from ſtrength be is called Strong.
( ategoy.
_—
— —
> ;
I NO NPE” 9
becauſe he may haue it, and be with-
our 1t, Or a formall qualitie, being de-
ved good, ad lagdable, all the reſt are |
—_—_—
Grammar, man us called « Grammer> | -
|
he Art of Lopicke.
The Art of Logicke
—_ — —_—————
Categer Cap. 1. Theſe are the ſame |
arguments with the former z for |
| Gramarian, urports the $kill of
, Grammar,and 15an accident, becauſe
it may be, and not be in man: It is a {
' formall qualitie, feeing it doth conſti-
. tuce,and denonunate a man a Gram-
marian; Grammar is an abſtraR,and
lignifies noching Logicallyzbeywg no
j
!
| More but a comprehenl1on ot pre-
cepts. If werctare it co'man, it 15 the
ſame with Grammarian:namely, che
\O
Diſtribution s when the whole tt dis
vided into parts.
Diſtributwon is called, the dividing of
the whole.T he gathering of the parts
called Inautlion. ,
When we ſay,a man hath two parts,
ſoule and bodic : Living Creatures
are reaſonable, and vareaſonable,
then we make a diſtribution :and 4-
riſterle doth acknowledge theſe diſtri-
. | butzons, Top, t#b, 6, ( ap» x. but in a
different ſence,
lame precepts litcrally, and habitu-
all -
|
together, to make vp the whole, us
|
Alcbough |
Rammaus.
_— ——
—_—_—— — —
—_
The Art of Logicke.
Although it is very probable, tha a
diftributzon doth formally conſitt in
an ax1oime, and therefore it belongs
ro che lecond part of Lopicke : ye [
will noc now an{iſt chereupon : be-
cauſe the arguments predicared 1n a
diitribucon, are meerely the Cauſes
| themſclucs 3 and we cannot finde a
' compounded<etF«& more cleercly re-
ſolved 1nto its Caules, then in a diſtri |.
bution, In the firit example of dittri-
bucion betore going,we find the mat-
ter informed, arguing the whole ct-
tet conſtituced by chat matter In the
ſecond, we hauethe ſpecifacall torme,
intorming cach ſeverall kindc,and ar-
guing thac whole ctte&, which com-
prehendeth both kindes. The Reader
ſhal! finde this anſiver tully explica-
ted, and proved, (þap.38.&c.inthe
matter of a diſtribution.
Arsſtetie doth icknowledge a divi-
l1on belongs to Logicke:Prior.cap.3 1s
but he maker 3t 4 Syllops/me 3 veranſe
om-thing 1: alway concluded therfrom:
'hyegh a weate one 5 becauſe ut pre-
wnes what it onght £0 proxe. He doth
: acC-
——
—
> a—_
| yh Art of Logicke,
———
ws
acknowledge induQtion allo, Top, 4
8.cap. 2. bb.1.cap.12. Prier 6b. 2.
c4þ. 2.3, 20d by an induftion bee on-
derſtandz, a colleflion of all the fi
lars, to make the totall: therefore he
doch acknowledge it in the preſent
ſence : but ( according to him ) it is!
one ſpecies, rar or forme of dijpu-
ting , little aiffering from a Syllogi/me:
for chus he {ayth of it: A Syllogs/rme,
% for Logicians, an Induftion for rhe
maltitude : Top. lib. 8. cap. 2.5ccond-
ly, It is an inſtrument more apt to per- |
ſwade, more open, better knowne to
ſence : and 18 common amongſt the mat-
| titude : but a Syllogi/me huh greater
| force to wife, and © more efjeiinall
| againſt them that are apt to gaine-ſay :
Top. bb, 1. Cap. 12.
Therefore ( according to him) |
diviſion, and induQtion belong to
' theſecondpart of Logicke ;notto the
firſt: and conſequently, a diſtributi-
|
' on muſt be referred thither alſo: for
both diviſion and induQtion are com
' prehended, or implycd, in adiſtri-
bution, according to Rewws.
— ——
| L A definition
pl
. .
” * J * Y . .
— — ————
The Art of Logicke,
|
eA definition ts, when wee declare
what a thing is, |
Therefore « perfelt definition, is no-
thing elſe, but 4 generall marke, or |
badge of the cauſes, which make the ef* |
ſence, or nature of the thing.
Thave aliccleto (ay touching this |
fourth ſeate zfor, I haue done enough |
in the aft, co fatisfic this : for, what
appertainesto that, may be applycd '
to this, Arforte doth acknowledge |
in the ſecond parc, as wee ſhall ice,
cap. 35. &c, The arguments diſpo-
{cd 1n a definition, belong tothe firſt
part of Logicke : becauſe as Thomas
fayth 1. dyts 25. q« 1. art. Is ads 2”,
' definitions, and that in the preſenc |
ſence too: bur giues them a place!
4 definition, according #0 the mient
thererf, doto brag tothe knowledge of
rhe thing d\« fineaz and this is the caſe
with ail 2xiomes whatſocucr, The
pr:dicace in a defiaxion belongs to
tlic ſcar of cauſes, even 1n the wdge-
ment of Rams him!elte ? for the pre-
OT /
dicatc doth ſer our what the fubieR, | |
nl —— =
|
—}
| The Art of Logtcke. 147 |
|
or thing defined 1s, and nothing can
doe that, but the cauſes: theretore a |
| dcfinitton deſeruesno other place in |
| Legicke, but the {cat of the caulcs,
| Vpon theſe premiſes, we may wel i
| conclude z theie foure feats of argu-
ments 1n queſtion ate ſuperfluous z
becauſe Arr hath given them place
alrcadie in the precepts tore-going,
| ! therefore wee muſt not leeke ut here,
| The ſecond parc of Logrcke comes 1n |
|
the next ranke:
a £ tt rn td. ” 4 ll
The art of Logicke,
rn —
#79»
DLeps PIO, 0 20,029 PBLGPE
THE
SECOND
PART.
C "TY > 4 = 5 £
Of diſpoſution, or indgment,
I'utherto wee haxe handled the firſt
part of Logicke; called Invention,
Wee come now to the ſecond. ter-
wed ludgement: /nagement is a
part of Logicke, teaching the maner
of diſpoſing argaments, that we ma)
wage well: for every thing ts to be
indged according to certaine rales of
diſpoſition. Hence this part of Lo-
gicke, ts called, both Indgement aud
diſpoſition: the ſame thing betug /19-
nificd by both terwes.
L 3 The
|
PTR
Ramus,
_" —— — _
= The Art of Logicke.
PN ran |
I Norbtp
THE
SECOND
PART.
C n4% FIAEA
of diſpoſition, or indgment.
I'uherto wee haxe handled the firſt
part of Logicke; called Invention,
Wee come now to the ſecond, ter-
wed ludgement : [ndgement "i"
part of Logicke, teaching the maner
of of ipeſ ng arguments, that we may
wedge well: for every thing us to be
indged according to certaine rales of
d/] poſition. Hence this part of Lo-
_—_ is called, both I . tiny
diſpoſition: the ſame thing being /ig-
nificd by both terwes.
| L 3 The
Ramus,
| The Art of Lootcke, |
|
5 this matter, 15 already
{cr down in thelecond!
48] chapter, andrepcated |
<a a tor the 2"
of the Reader. There 15no great difh-
cultic in the parts, nor dittcrence in |
the whole, trom Av:i/forle: I haue |
ſhewed the conſent of both Authors |
in the place alcadgcd, ard I will now |
giue my opinion of the ſence, of cve- |
ry thing that ſeemes not clecre c-|
nough, |
[ ſudgement Diſpoition | Theſe
words are vſed for the ſame thing,
and that fitly z for they are the ſame |
thing variouſly conlidered, the fe- |
cond intends the firſt, and the firſt
proceeds from the ſecond. The ſe-
cond 15the fountaine: the firſt is the |
ſtcame : and they make one con-
tinued thing, The firſt is the ſu-}
preame, the ſecondthe ſubordinate
end, and meanes vato the ſupreame,
in that reſpeR they vary z and not 0-
therwiſe,
[Apart]
— The an of Legicke,
[ A part] Logicke hath parts, even
by it ſclte : tor che precepts chereof
are of dittin natures, as members in
| the whole, and cheretore we muſ} ſo
conceive of them, The precepts thar |
are contained vnder this name, make
a (econd part: tor, the diſpoling of
things doth ſuppoſe, that, the tlungs
themſclucs haue a being already,
| [ Diſpoſng | Thele words, and the
' reſt chat follow, doc containe the
whole ſhot, or generall ſumine char
ariſeth from all the precepts,belong-
ing to chis part of Zogscke: andit l1g-
nihech,a toyning together of dittin&t
things in an orderly trame,
| \ Argzments ] viz. I hoc lingle,
or incomplexed termes whereof wee
ſpake in he former part.
[ /#dge ] Iudggnent, 15 an aft of
the vnderſtanding, whereby we de-
termine in our ſelues, that this or thag
1s true, or faiſe, T his word fers out
[the end of chole precepts which be-
long to this part of Logicke 3 name-
ly, thething they are f- tor z and the
(
Profit we receue by them,
———— ————— ————— A ——
Lt be) ae.
| OY CHAOS eee en nt
os Mrs
'1F 6 [ Well] Thar 1s, not doubtfully : |
11:18 bur even as the things are in them-
ſciues: and this 1s the perte&tion of
1] | Iudgement. |
| T his farſt and vniverſall prece pt,
may fatly be expreſled in thele terms.
1. Some precepts of Logicke,
doe teach vs to diſpoſe argu-
ments fitly, that thereby wee
might judge of truth, and fal- |
ſhood cleerely, and certainely.
2, Theſe precepts make vp a ſc-
cond part of Legecke.
Now wee vnderftand the grolle
ſumme, wee ſhall the berter know
the particulars,
GH A P. XXX. |
| | | Of the Diviſion of Diſpoſition,
| IN chis Chapter wee muſt divide
| aſunder, what we found together
4 in the former; and fo proccede, till}
fi we have vawedevery ſeverall pre-'
; F\,-- | CEpr. Indeement
—” OOO — ISO - 1542 > OOO I OE oe a rn
Of
—
-—
/
The Art of Logicke,
Axionaticall.
[udgement » |
By this ſentence the precepts be-
longing to this part, are devided unco |
ther ſeverall kindes:; and it 1sas much |
as to ſay: Thelc precepts teach vs to!
trameargumentsin an Axiom, & in |
a diſcourſe, that thereby wee may |
iudpe of truth, and falſhood contay- |
[ned inthem both, Theſe (1 ſay) are |
feverall kindes, becauſe they be di-|
ſtint manners of diſpoſing, The firit |
branch ſuppoſeth, that ſome ſpecch
may be called an Axiome,and that 1s |
true, In chis place, the word Axtome
lignifiech no more, but a declaratiue,
or pronouncing ſentence, This kinde |
of ſpeech deſerues that name, becauſe |
| ie15(in the naturetherot)more exccl- ]
lentchen any other ſpeech of Man,
An Axiome 1s thus defined,
An Enunciative ſpeech, i that,that
conteincth truth or falſtood, |
| | Wee
Xy
Te
—_ e_—_—_——
The Art of Logicke,
2, | Wee haue chis precept from Arr |
ſtotle, de interpre. cep. 4, He allignes
| ic che firſt place, and well worthy;for
| | truch and talſhcod is the firit obieR |
{ of our 1udg< ment, and belongs to all
Axiomes whatloever, and nothing
but an Axiome containes truth and| +
fallhood. |
| [Spzech] This word contames the |" |}
ellence or naturc belonging to all
Ax1omes, and other ſpceches which
| arc not Axiomes, In thisplace it (1g-
niftes, the inward ſentence of the
minde, and the written ſentence, as
'F well as the ſentence pronounced 1n
| {- words,
= | [ Enunciatine.| This word, impor-
| | ceth a ſpecies,or one kinde of ſpeech :
| | & reftraines that word which 15com-
| | mon to many, vnto that one kinde |
\1'Y which belongstothis place, Enuncia- |
it | - ring, or Pronouncing 1mplyeth, chat | L
t| ſpeech is the Herald, and proclaimer | |
[ of mans minde, and ſo iris indeede, |
by inſtitution, not of it ſelfe. The fgmi* |
ion of words, followes the intent of | * |
the ſpeaker anal not otherwiſe : (0 ſaith |
—
——_
_
ee a em R
Ariſile
4 (/ | n Ah
, 4 ——_—_—
— CG res
—
.
—— — JJ RR
Ti be Art of Logicke.
Ariſtotle inthe fourth Chapeer all: d- |
ged.
[ Truth ana falſhood ] Thee words, ;
conraine the proper, and formall _e-) |
ing of cvery Axiome in common, |
Rams makes truth anifatſhood a pro:
pertre belonging to every axiome: but.
Ariſtotle doth more, he placeth tbe
primary nateye of an axiome therein;
and {o he may well doe ; for thereby |
all axiomes are made to differ from :
all other kindes of ſpeech: If there be
any other thing, chat giues being to |
an axiome, from whence thus pro- :
pertie doth flow : cither wee are not |
able roapprehend it, or want words
to expretle1t. I fay, truth, or falſhood |
doth make axiomes to differ from all
other kindes of ſpeech : for lingle,
| termes, 4S Man, Peter, torn, tO fit,
| &c, and all commanding, and intrea-'
ting ſpeeches, containe "neither treth, |
nor falſhood: as eAriſtotle hath well
obſcrued, De intcrpre. Cap. 2.3.4-
Truth ( 1n the _— of all
|
|
|
|
Philoſophers) ſignifies, the ad _ -
fon of the thing, and our vnderſtan-
ding. |
—— ————-
_— — ——————
Rm
"Th ”=y of Logicke. |
RAMs.
GI
-
derſtanding , and declaratiuely in a
— —
| ding. Wherefore truth, is radically | F
inthe thing, and formally i in the vn- | |
propolition, Wee muſt conceme of
talſhood according herevnto.
A propoſition is then true,when it pro-
nonnceth of a thing, as the thing is
indeed,
Ariſtoite ſayth thus too ; Speeches
are thentrue, when they pronounce 4s 4
thing is in it ſetfe: De imterpre, Cap. 9. |
Dnare cur orationes & meta lib, 4.
Cap. 7 ext 2.7 of, wm enum convents Cf
Thus Tho, 1. p.q.21. art. 2. in cor.
I. dſt. 46. q. 1.471. 2.4d 1*, Ando
all Philoſophers ſpeake ; I will give |
you the words of Albertinus ( alcar- |
ned Schooleman)1in oy ofthem all.
_ opo/ition ( layth he ) 17 trae,
bick s A RL © ro the thing pro- | |,
TI be inconforma- | |
ble.fok 265. col. 1.
|
Contingent. |
Aras anne i #4
Neceſſary. |
Contmeent,
—_—_ ww /
IE
— _
wajes irne, and can» ot be falſe. An
axiome neceſſarily falſe, is called
1npeſſible.
Ariſtotle (pezkes wholly after this
[= ſort ; Ewery propoſition (faych he) doth
' ſigmifie ſemething to be, ether neceſſars-
ly, or comngently. Prior, lib, 1.Cap-1.
And tutther, he layth Poſter, {ib. 1.
Cap. 33. That is neceſſary, that camor
be otherwi/e. S ome thmgs are truc.and
are, but may be otherwiſe. Opinion is
concerning that, that 18 true, or falſe,
but a otherws/e.
For the full «xplication of this point,
we muſt firſt vnderſt3d,that a3x1omes
are nccetfary, and contingent, by rea-
ſon that the things whereof they pro-
pounce are necelſary,and contingent,
Now, that &s ſayd to be neceſſary, that
is ſo, and cannet be otherwiſe. Thu s
Janphy, and after a ſort. Sunply, when
« | the being of athing u of aud by it ſelfe,
and the canſes thereof, ſo nece[[ar),tbat
the
— — — ——— -—
|
|
The Art of Logicke. I57
Contingent, when it 1s in ſuch ſort
trme,that it may alſo at ſometime be
falſe. Thus ts called opinion.
A. neceſſary axiomey is when it 1 al- | Rams,
a
oO ——— woaaqcgp pr |
99> OI WP we
8 BU IES. wY "he
SR oY © IRS |
iy” KI La? a .W % od Y Su $ T 3A bes *4 ” F, "it ”
a k , TY c : £ 6 - as Tc Pl 7-8 &«/ HR % I. 3.
- , = _ 2+ By
is. 4 ! 4 a
vas . "_
Ree =, © *k 6 s
I» Ste 4 s
Lg 6 bo. i y —— p,
7 d + SY
RS ren or
wm ro or——
4 Fr « © 4
tad We-2
. 7%
w LY,
LI.
4 ——
- FS; , 4 ater”:
Ls PR » : A gm. "AS
. =.
*
; 7
.
_
EET <_ —
Juan CLI II GCSE SL
|
|
—
o
WI
»
RANMWE.
—_——— ——
ee OO P
The art of Logicke.
ding. Wherefore truth, 1s radically |
inthe thing, and formally ; in the vn- |
| derſtanding , and declaratiuely in a |
propolition, Wee mult conceue of
talſhood according herevnto.
A propoſition is then true,when it pro-
nonnceth of a thing, as the thing us
indeed,
Ariſtoite ſayth thus too ; Speeches
are thentrue, when they pronounce as «
thing us un it ſetfe: De immterpre, Cap. 9.
ware cur orationes Cr meta 116. 4.
Cap. 7 text 27 (mm enm convents CH |
_ Tho, 1. p.q.21. art. 2. in cor.
» 46. q-1.471.2,4d 1, Ando | |
al Philoſophers ſpeake ; I will giue |
you the words of Albertinus ( alcar-
ned Schooleman)in ſtead of them all.
That propoſition ( layth he ) :7 tre,
which is conformable to the thing pro-
nounced of, and falſe if it be | 146 26
ble.fok 265. col. 1.
van
Contingent.
Nece[ary.
Contmugent,
_
>
4
. *
% -
» 4 A
Wt
_ <—_ — A en EE In nn tain gs
_ CR
- | the being of a thing us of aud by it ſelfe,
The Art of Logicke.
Contingent, when it is in ſuch ſort
trne,that it may alſo at ſometime be
falſe. T his ts called opinion.
A. neceſſary axiome, is when it 11 al-
wajer irne, and cannot be falſe. An
axiome neceſſarily falſe, is called
| ſort ; Emery propoſition (faych he) aoth
1peſſible.
Ariſtotle ipezkes wholly after this
' ſigmifie ſemething to be, eaher neceſſari-
{y, or conngently. P r1or, 616.1.Cap-1.
And futther, he layth Poſer. 46. x.
Cap. 33. That is neceſſary, that cannot
be otherwi/e. Some thmgs are truc.and
are, but may be otherwiſe. Opinion xs
concerning that, that 14 ire, or falſe, |
but gm, otherwiſe.
For the full «xplication of this point,
we muſt firſt vnderſtad,that axiomes
are ncceifary, and contingent, by rea-
ſon that the things whereof they pro-
nounce are necel]ary,andcontingent.
Now, that « ſazd to be neceſſary, that
is ſo, and cannot be otherwiſe. Thus s
Jumply, and after a ſort. Sungply, when
andthe canſes thereof, ſo nece[[ar);tbat
the
I— 0 ——— — CC —— —
Rammns, |
— —_ _— — ——
—
|
| 258
The Art of Logicke,
the thing that 31, bath its being whoty
without relarion to any other thing witb-
our ut [eife. A thing is neceſſary by ſup-
| potion, and after a ſort, when it is by
| force of another, the firſt, is called ne-
Ce(ſary, {Smply, and properly : becanſe it
& wholy amspoſſible it ſhould be other-
wi/e then « s, thus farre Ariftotle me-
ta. hb. 5,cap.8, 1n the firſt ſence,all
Axiomesthac pronounce of God,are
necellary, cicher in their truth, or fal-
ſhood. In the ſecond ſence, ſome
propoſitions that pronounce of the
creature be neceſlary, and ſome con-
tingencyn their truth, and tallhood, I
will ſhew you how or when.
> Neceſ-
fery
next canſe us
deternuned to
one
2, hen the 1"
Efficiently
1. I indeterminate
Contmgent vnto doing,
_ on ext
cauſe
_— —
—— — -
The Art of Lopicke.
And apropoſicion, when it pro-
nounceth of created cttefts, is true,
or falſeaccordivg hereunto z as wee
ſhall more plainely ſec when wee
' come to ſhew the icverall natures of |
Axiomes:
Every thing ( \ayih Ariſtotle) us |
neceſſarie when ut ts, and every thing |
| neceſſarily 1; not, when 1t 15 not © but
thu neceſſitie, ts ror a neceſſitie ſimply.
de tnterpre, cap. 9. Eroe. Vnod.
I "rt lhew the Da vſe of |
theſe precepts when I come to the
ſpeciall kinde of Axiomes in the next
Chapter : cheretore I torbeare it in
this place, leaſt ] ſhould hale in ſomes ;
thing before the tine, or repeat what |
I haue ſayd ſufficiently alrcady:thearc- |
fore hererT will end thoſe things
which belong to all Axiomes wm
' COMMON, |
|
CHAP. ,
——_
— 9}
160
Theart of Legicke.
R amays.
Te
Cuiar KHASES
Of a ſimple Axtome,
Simple.
An Axwme $
A ſimple Axiome is that, the band
| whereofuaVerbe.
Compound .
Riftotle (peakes wholly after this
ſort: Jn enuntiatine ſpeech is c+-
ther fimeple,or compornded of thoſe that
be ſimple. A fimple Ennnciation, it 4
vojce that ſigmifieth that ſomething us,
or is not, according to the diverſe of
times: and he calleth theſe Axiomes
one ſpeech, becauſe one thing onely 1s
predicated of another. de imterpre. Cap.
5+ CF 10.
Now wee haue the definition of a |
| ſimple axiome, wee muſt vatold it: |
It containeth three things, 1, The
(
| rermeto another, 3, The framing of |
c
Ts in. 4a
rerines of it, 2, The cxtention of one | ;
_— p—
—
|
al
|
|
|
[
| but very vnduely : for, the predicate
' doth not follow vpon the ſubie& ;
ſomecompound axiomes, as I (hall
- ſhewindue place.
petwall [igne of thougs predicated, and
ſubiefted, T hus Ariflotle hach taught
The Art of Logzcke.
terme (layth Ariſtotle) Prior, lib, 1.
Cap. I. into which the propoſition #1 re> |
ſolved, ard they be three: v12. The pre- |
dicate, The [bieft predicated of, and |
the Verbe that comes betweene them : |
wow the Verb of u ſel/e ſrgnifies nothing:
bur ſerveth to compound thoſe things
that cenxot be wnderſtood, tall they be
Componnded ; and thereſore it 45 aper-
thoſe termes cogether, I call chat a |
|
VS De interpre. ( ap.3. The Verbe(in
the comon language of the Schools)
15 called the band,or gouple: and that
terme aprees well with chis dorine
of Ariftetle:for a band doth compoſe
diuers things together, Ramw doth |
Call the /abie&, and the predicate, by
the name of antecedent, & conſequert:
neither in the thing, nor in our ap-
prehen(ion. Thoſe termes belong to
A” D—_— . - — << ——
O——_— —— —— ——_— — — —— — — — _
The Art of Legicke. |
|
| For further illuſtracion, i it15 need-!
fu!l tor vs to know: that,
|
| Identicall. |
Y Naturall,
Predica- Diref,
tion 5 Contrary tonature.
| Notwaturall
Be(id:s nature.
[aentitall predication, us that which
nalure ſages maſt be ; DiveRt is that.
which according to rature may be ( on- |
trary to nature, 11 when the ſubiett, |
and predicate are incompatible : when | |
they abhorre cne axother ( ar we ſay. )
| Befodes natnre, when the predicate s 85 |
| rndecent for the ſubirt':; ov the fabiedt
undecent for the predicate. Thus the | |
' Teſwites have taught ys in their Pre- |
| face ro Porphyrie. q. 1, art. 4. and that |
| to very good purpoſe, Now predi-|
cation, 1Staken 1n chis place for natu-
'rall predication, not for that whichis:
| againſt nature:for predication againſt
| nature is a dcte&ion,no perfettion in |
art: and conſequently, when we meet
| with it 1n any diſcourſe, we muſt re-
je& it, orrctorme 1t by art,
— —_—
By!
The Art of Logicke,
By verbe, 1s meant 4 vojue or name
that ſignifies a time, either preſent paſt
or to Come: whoſe office it 55 10 ———
the predicate, and ſubiett- or ro ſenere|
them, each from otyer, « And this ts ol
nece{jery,that no ſpeech can be enuncia-
tixe till that be edded:as Ariftotle hach!
duly remembred : [nterpre, { «p. 3»
&
We may .make tryall or theſe __
cepts1n this example ;
Clan iu reaſonable.
This ſentence is an Axiome : be: |
cauſe ir containes truth--or talſhood.!
2, It is a {imple Axiome: becauſe one
thing barely, and vacompoundedly, |
15 referred to another. ;, It hath chree
termes, VIZ. 1. Man. 2. Reaſonable.
| : .
| 3. [s. Rationale 15 the predicate:
becaule it is reterred viito man.
' Man 1s the ſubie&, becauſe it recer
ueth rationalitie. /s. ſerues as a band
to tye them 'both cogerher : trom
whence they receive (igmfjcation,
andrruth, or falſhood, 4. This predi-
M 2 cation
— — — S——
#-Þ FIT
Rams.
together. 5, It 1s Idencicall; becauſe |
rationalinie belongs ro mans etJence.
When we fay Socrates 15 prudent,
we haue the like propolition, and a
dire&.predication:becaule prudence
ſets out Socyates dire Fly, even as a
ſtraight linethar is extended berween
| two points, And {o much tor the firſt
thing contained in the definition ofa
{imple Axiome,
wt Delt AD IA
CnHrayPe, XXXII.
Of the ſeverall kindes of
| ſimple AXxi0mes.
Generall,
A ſimple Axione a)
Specsall.
Generall,when the common coſequent
%s generally attributed to the com-
'The Art of Lopicke. |
cation is nacurall : becaule it agrecs |
co both theſetermes to be thus ioyned |
mon antecedent.
A |
Cs
1. | !
— The arto f Logicke,
Particular,
A ſpeciall Axiome a
Proper.
A proper Axiome, 11 when the conſe»
|
quent 15 attributed to a proper ante»
cedent.
Pwtuular, when the common conſe-
guent 5s parixeularly atirebuted to
the antecedent.
L1 thele precepts agree well
with Ariffotle : for he teacheth
vson this manner, A propoſition is es-
ther wniverſall, or particular, and mn
part. Prior. lib. 1, ( ap. 1o2. interpre.
Cap. 7+ Top. tib. 2. Cap. 1.416.3.cap.6.
e14 vniverſall is that, where the pre-
dicate ts referred vnto all the ſabief,
Cute is referred unto ſome party not un- |
to all that «5 contained in the ſubelt.
Thus faych he Prior. 6b. 1. Cap. 2.
but more plainely at the end of has
Chapter, Then (fayth he) the Predi-
cate 14 referred wnto all, or the whote
ſubiett, when as there is nothing in the
ſubieft, unto which the predicate is not
3 re-
——_ .—
— —— —
A perticalar js that wherean the preds-: |
AUEWEUAn cc.
mm_——_ RS
— —— ws ,
GI.
—_— EIS
————— ——
— - - ——_—
. — _ |
referred. The fame thing 1$ taught
DY . 114-9. 1. ſent. q.5.lu.B. Wee ave
then affrmc UntVer/ally, when there ts
x09! bins cortatred vnder the ſnbictt,of
The Art of Logtcke,
which. che preduate is nor affirmed.
Thas us an untverſail zegation, when as
there 15 notbing compretended wndcr
the ſubiet}, jrom whence the predicate
$5 0! reazoned. |
[ Common | This word doth ſup-
pole, tha, predicated and ſubieed
arguments unporr thungs vnuverſall,
and (1ngular, and inthat it doth well |
Ariſtotle hah the fame thing, and
war very plainely opened, de anterpre.
Cap. 7. Tixleare his words, Some
things are univer/all, other ſome ſing#-.
lar. 1 call that yniver/all which of the
nature thereof ir apt to be attributed to |
many: that x ngular which ts not ſo,
[Generally | A ching is predicared
generally,when rhe torall being there-
of is xcterrcd vmo all, or the whole
lubieftz Thus no common predicare
can iruly be arributed vnto the fub-
ie}. Wee cannot truly ſay all men is
all living-Crcarures, as Arsforle hath |
well
—_ > ————
CA —_
— — ———_
| The ant of Lopteke,
UT CA A EEE EE_
Acommon tiung 1s predicated of the
lubie& generally, whenit is referred
to all, orthe whole ſubieR, ſofarre as
the ſ1bictt can receiue 1t, 2nd thus a
| commonthing may truly be predica-
| ted of the ſubictt, Now in thus caſe
| the axionac is gener3ll,when the ſub-
1e& importeth a thing common, It 15
(ingular, when the ſubictt umporteth
a thing ſingular, or particular z there-
forc 1n this tenic, the definitions of a
generall,and ſpeciall Axiome are cer-
raincly true, and taught by A/zace,
I./enr.q. 5./it. 4, tm theſe words:
then the ſubictl 15 [ufficient'ly diſtribu
| ted by thu word All, or ſome ether that
5s equall thereto : then that prepoſition
18 /uffictexrly outverſall, A propoſition
ts then ſuffizently fingular, when the
fuviett is a terme truly [ingular. I call
that a frng#ular terms (tn proper ſpeech )
. which cannot be affirmed of ſnbieft;
tmporting r<ell dxſtuntt things.
That we may tully vndertand the
nature of prcdications, we muſt ob-
ſerue({wuth Ariftotle de interpre.cap.7
þi 1a M 4 &
well oblerycd. De interpre. ( ap. 7-|
DN
th A
The Art of Logicke, |
|
|
|
[i
|
——
& 10. ) T hat, this word All when we
| find u mn a propoſit#on,1t doth ;2ot ſugmfie
| che univer/all predication it ſelte : but
43 onely a note of predication; And tur-
ther, cheſe woras All,or None, ave ſig-
nifie no more, but an affirmation, and
negation umver ſally made, According-
ly herevnto, Thomas ſayth,Tbe preds-
Cation it ſelje 114 no more, but an abſs- |
lute reſerring of a thing ſignified, vrto |
the ſubiet : as when we referre whue- |
neſſe to 4 man This word All, or None,
doth but goe with the predication, ard
1mporteth an oraer of the predicate Un-
to theſubieft, 1.Þ.9.31-4rt. 3.1 cor.
Inche like manner, he ſayth ; Thss
wora ſome, that makes 4 propoſition to
be particular, doth defigne an univer- |
fall, or common terme uudetermnuately ; |
from whence 1t doth not determine the |
ſame, unto this or that ſingular thing. |
Opx/c. 48. De interpre. Cap. 8, By this
(1 hope) the nature of every predi-
cation is ſuthciently cleered,and made
calje to our ynderſtanding,
Tt may bedoubted, whether Ram
and 4r:ftorle doc agree in thelc pre-
CCPts, }
|
i The art of Lwgicke. | 169
OO I i oe og Oo Oo OI III OO II GOTO
cepts, and that for three reaſons, |
1. Arsftotle makes ſome propolicions
indefinite, 2, He makes no propoli- |
{
g
L it |
tion proper, 3, He doth notrequire | |
any common terme vnto an vn1- ,
1 verſall predicagon. I antwere, not- | |
| withitanding all this, yet they doe 2- BS
gree. And 1 doc fo anſwer, becauſe
1 the opening of theſe three things,
| doth giue cvident light vnto che na- { |
| ture of predications: a thing worthy |
| our knowledge, for predication1s the |
very Cenctcr, and hte of Logicke : all
| chat goes betore, deſcends hither, |
| and all that tollowes, flowes from | |
| hence. 6. |
Tothe brit, Arr;/totle doth not
conccuuethat an mdefinite propolit-
| ON, dothreally differ trom an vniver- |
all, and paracular. I ſhew it two} =
wayes, fhrit, He names 1t but oncein | |
; Fallhis writings(lofarrc as I can find.) ; if
4 | Secondly, Hee makes a proper pro: | |
| polition co be indefinite, onely, be- | 6-2
cauſe ir wents the ſignes of univerſal, |
and particular predication. Prior ib. 1. | J. Bo
Cap. rt, now the want of them doch | | | |
nor
— Su —
won —
_ | ZM
| 170
———
The Art of Logiche. |
i ferred vmto vniverſall, or particular :
© — — << _— -_ tl rmu—_—_—_ ——_— CY
not, make a reall difference, as wee
haue already heard by his owne |
words: againc, they may well be re- |
becauſe the extenlion of predication,
followes the intent cf predicating:and
it isnot hardto(hew, where himlclte |
makes a propolition to be generall, |
that wantechthe terms ot all, & none,
© To the ſecond, Itistrue, he makes
no propolition to be proper ( 1n ex-
pretle words) yet hee doth it 1n the
thing : for, that propoſition 1s contai-
ned vnder thoſe, which he cals partt-
cular, for a particular propoſition
(formally ) hach an vnlimmited ſub- |
ic& : bur vertually it hath a ſingular |
thing for the lubic : when we ſay, |
ſome man 15 learned, wec alligne NO |}
H——
I
man of certaintiz, vnull we deſcend E
to a particular, as Pleto, or _ |
ce. and this is a proper propolition
according to Rame :; moreover,it he.
meant not to: comprehend a proper
propolition, vnder his particular pro-
poſition, then hee hath omitred one
precept, elſentiall co this Art: ſay the
doarine
_—
%
1
| %
The Art of Logicke.
$71
doarine of a proper propolition, 1s
efſcnaa)] co this Art : and Lavow rte- |
ven by the mdgement .of Ar/tct/e
himlcltc : tor be doth viethem oi:en, |
and mutt vic them ottner then any |
other ; tor, hee makes an individuall
thing,a ſubic thar receiues allother
argumencs whatſoever 53 withour |
which hcy cannoc hauc' being, ncr
we ally certaine knowledge ; but we '
may not thunke, that he hath omurted |
it : for that 1stocharge him vndecent- |
ly : ( ſeaing hehathdefervedlo well)
and againſt reaſon: becauſe of rhe al- |
legacionsalreadie made: to conclude, |
he doth giue inſtance of a contradic-
tion 1n {ingular, or proper Axiomes
de mterpre. cap. 10.
To the third, Ariſtorte doth re-
quire a common thing 10 vmverſall |
predications, and a (ingular mn (1ngu-
larpredications, andthunkes it muſt
be ſo: becaulethe common, and lin-
gular naturc of things, isihe very firſt
ground, and originall reaſon'from
whence predications muſt be vniver-
all, and (ingular: as wee finde by his
OWNCc
I IEPI—_
” i...
7s
<—_
The Art of Logicke,
.| e&ce. and this is a Proper propolition
————.
On IRE a —_
Precept, ciſentiall co this Art:I ſay the
A E—
not make a reall difference, as wee
haue already heard by his owne |
words: againe, they may well be re-
ferred vnto vniverſall, or particular :
becauſe the cxtenlion of predication,
followes the intent cf predicating:and
it isnot hardto ſhew, where himſclfe
makes a propolition to bg generall,
that wantechthe terms of all, & none,
© To the ſecond, It istruc, he makes
no propolitzon to be proper ( 1n ex-
pretle words) yet hee doth it in the
thing : for, chat propoſition 1s contai-
ned vnder thoſe, which he cals partt-
cular, for a particular propolition
(formally ) hath an vnlummited ſub-
ic& ; bur vertually it hath a ſingular
thing for the lubic& : when we ſay,
ſome mas ts learned, wee alligne no
man of certaintic, vnuill we deſcend
to a particular, as Plets, or Ariſtotle
—_— ———
according to Rams ; moreoyer,it he
meant notto comprehend a
ropolition, vnder his particular pro-
SR then hee hath omitted one
doarine
0. on So San 41 awe ca wo ooo 2 £4
i 00 OO& RR ono
_ —_— ————————————————_—
5
The Art of Logicke.
do&rine of. a'proper propolition, 1s
ellenaa)l to this Arc: and lavow re- |
ven by the mdgement of - Ar:/tit'e |
himlſcltc: tor tie doth viethem 6iren, !
and mutt vic them ofttner then any |
other ; tor, hee makes an individual |
thing,a ſubic tharreceuesallother /
arguments whatſocver 5 without |
which thcy.cannoc hauc* being, ncr |
we ally certaine knowledge ; but wc
may not thinke, that he hath omitred
it : for that istocharge him vndecent-
ly : ( ſeaing hehathdeſervedio well)
and aganſt reaſon: becauſe ofthe al-
legationsalrcadic made: toconclude,
he doth giue inftance of a concradic-
tion in f1gular, or proper Axiomcs
de wnterpre. cap. 10.
To the third, Ariſtotle doth re-
quire a common thing 1n vymverſall |
predications, and a ſingular in (ingu- |
larpredications, andthunkes it muſt
be ſo: becaulethe common, and lin-
gular nacurcot chings, ishe very firſt |
ground, and. originall. reaſon from |
whence predications maſt be vniacr-
allen Gngalir: ame Gd by his |
OWNC
ec
| 2h
v2 ©} % | \&
—c_—___
The Art of Logicke.
172
owne words: de int 4.C4p. 9. Here
I willputan end " ſecond thing
ed in the definition of a (1m-
| ple Axiome. Cap. 31- | |
———
this Chapter wee mult diſcuile
6 themaner how arguments ac fra-
med ina ſimple AX10me : and then |
wee(ſhall haue diſpacched all chat
comained in the forelayd definition.
| Now, that poine isreſolved in thelc
| words ©
| | | Of au affirm:4 Axiome.
| Ramms, |
%
"4; &
:
A
firmed Deed when it is denjed. |
Aviſtorle ecacheth rhe lame a7
The Art of Logicke.
( for fubſtanct)de interpre cap. 5.& 6. \
Prioy bib 1. cap. 2. An Enunciatine |
\ | ſpeechus ether affirmation,or negation. |
J | It affirmes when the predicate us affir- |
mea of, or 10yned wnto the [ubiett. [t
denyeth, when the predicate ts denyed
| of, or removed from the ſubiett, Wee
' haue the ſame thing in Alace.n,ſent.
'9- 5.4it. BB, Every affirmation, and
Wegarion, confiſteth of « Nowne, and a
| Verbe : without 4 yerbe there ts no af-
firmation, nor negation ; and thu 1 ſay:
becanſe the werbe([ 1 | is referred wnto
| the ſubiet, a5 inthis example, Socra-
| ter 6s Inft, Socrates i not Infl. Here,
the word 1S, and 15 wot, 1s referred in
the one,to him that is Inſt: in the other
20 bins that is not luſt, Thus farre 4-
ryſtorle de imterpre. cap. 10. Omni af-
| firmatio &:c.—— Hoc dico ec.
| Remws applyes this precepe to all
\) - | Axiomeswhatſocver. Ariſtotle makes
| affirmation, and negation proper co
ſimple Axiomes: both fay true,in the
ſenſe they intended, and boch choſe
* | ſences doe agree well enough toge-
ther : but Ariffotles mdgement 15
more |
| |
4
£: .
: :
:
,
? ; _ TIRES LES
* 9 . . —
. . © 4 %
"Yn, =_ — uncly
= .
X —m_—
| d
4 | '7
F
uf
-
\
I
=
The Art of Legicke.
| Ramus.
more. accurate, and Logical, as wee
ſhall ſee when wee 'come to com-
pound Axiomes: therefore, for. d this
time we wall proccede.
From hence ariſeth the adit.
bag 2oang
| 7 Frew bei } Theſe words, doe
referre vs.to the ground or reaſon
from whence propolitions arc con-
tradifory-: namely, from their vn-
yerlall,and particular affirmation, and
negation, Of them I ſay, if Rane
meant to referrevs to the next, and
formall reaſon of contradiftion ; :chen
this reference is true: bur if they rc-
terre vs to the firſt, and originall
| ground of contradiaion, then it18 not
iruc, Ariſtotle de interpre; cap.6. doth
referre vs to the things theinſelues
which areſubicQed, and predicated,
asto the firſt founnaine,and originall |
of contradi&tion, mn propolicionsBe- |
cauſe ( faith he) A rhimg that us, i
not, as if ut were,ſo alſo, ſomething is
affirmed |
; *
a k um hngedd...
pronounced wot to be, and that which ss | © ©
tn tn. ot Ml
4
F 4
£ 6 = Y
-
+ ». +
'4 « *
CE ne err
' :
- > . ”
LA, £ —_— A Ox « "Y Fu "I-* + -, BM © | PO
bs F_& re : . 4 \ &->. : R k ralh 5.4 *4 5 g Dy - » y of
: *X r "# — * - Pl * , - p + * 3 oy. F. «> has "2 M*. Þ+ F; = "i
r, : * . "1 JF. A c ' *. S : : . © v
Fs. I Nee x7 DB 5 $22 — :
—
The art of Logicke.
173
affirmed to be after this, or that yuan-
| wer: and is not after that manner. At
other timer,ſome things are pronounced
| to be preſent, which, ave not preſents
: therefore ſome thing that is affirmed, ts
| denyed, and ſome thmy that is denyed,
85 affirmed, and thereby dffirmation-is
oppoſed to negation, and negation to af-
firmatica : which oppoſition makes con»
| £radifFion, Thus tame he: If weetake
both theſe Authors togatſrer, we ſhall
ſee the whoſe reaſon of Contradii»
on, 7
A Commradittion it when the ſame
Axiome is affirmed, and denyed. »
—c
Wee hauc this ſentence in Aliacs.
I. ſert-q. 5.4t,M. A Contradittue
( fayth he) & @n affirmation of "ne
thing, and the negation of the ſame *: |
and this 1s as well of propoſitions, 48 of |
ſingle termes. Ariſtotle doth fully a-
| greewich them both, hen(ſaych he) |
the affirm:110n of one thing, and the ne-
gation of the ſame, are oppoſed, then |
there ts a Contradiftion, De interpre.
| Cap. 6. «Atque hoc eſto, Sc, Now we |
ſee
Ramuwus.
—— —
JONI 4 200wT
MO”. ——
Pm Y
| 276
The Art of Logicke.
Rams.
ſee what a Contradiction is,we muſt
inquire further aiter the manner how
one, and the fame propolition 1s at-
firmcd, and denyed,
Generall.
A Contradiition a
—_—_
Specrall.
Generall, when a general negation, is
oppoſed to @ generall affirmation.
Speciall, when a particular negation
6 oppoſed to an yniverſall affirmass-
.n, and contrriw/e.
A proper propoſition, is contraditted
by a proper propoſition.
Ariſtotle teacherh the ſame things,
bur in differenc words. Propoſitions
(according to him) ave oppoſed «s con- |
traries,or contradiftories. When a gene-
rall aſfirmatize, i: oppoſed by « generall |
negatine, then they are oppoſed 4s con-
freries : but when the ſame predicate ts
omver/ally affirmed, in the one:aud not
emiver/ally, im the other, of the ſame
—
ER
——— — - - ———__ —_—_—_—
bw ——W—_——— — ——_— - as _—
Py
which ; then they are ed as cons
4 F: rhe wh Iraditto-
. | .
. .
—_—
*
OC Do ie IO > ACA AU AIR
- — ——e— CO
_— —_— ——
s 1]
i
|
|
l
'
|
PR The Art of Logicke.
iradiforwes : de wmierpre.Cap.7. A fin-
guley propoſition 1 contraditted by 4
ſingular : 45,5 ocrates 11 wiſe, Socrates
is net wiſe, cap, 10. Perſpicunnm aut ens
ef.
' I All men
| The thud, is a paricular negatiue 5
\ [ . | andthe one doth contradict the 0-
| ' , ther, Theſccond, is an vimverſall ne-
game.
A generall contrad\Rion may be falſe
in both parts.
A ſpeciall Contradettion cannot be
Irxe aud falſe together in bub parts,
Ariſtotle hath the fame precepr,
word tex word ; inthe placcs latt al-
ledged. HS
Theſe examples following, will
ſet out the precepts of an Axiome,
contained in this, and che tormer
Chapter.
þ
are learned. 3-S 012 24n is not learned.
2. No man us learned. 4+ Sowee man is {earned
The firſtis an vniverfall affirmative,
—y__— ———
| 5. Socrates bs learned, 6. Socrates is not learned,
|
The Art of Logicke,
atiue, T he fourth, a parcicular at-
nnd: and they are oppoſed as
Contraditorics, The fift, is an aff
matiue proper, The ixr,isa negariue
proper ; therctore,they allo arc Con-.
tradiories. T he firſt, and {econd are |
oppoſed 2s Contxaries. Raw calls
ther oppolition, a generall Contra-
dition, |
Now I haue finiſhedallthat is con- |
tained in the definition of a limple |
Axiome, touching the diſpoſing of |
Arguments, In the next place wee
_ ſce, how truth 1s contained in
oy Ax10me,
Cunuar XASSLIL
Of ſimple Axiomes neceſſarily |
Erie 113 COmmon, |
- the 30. Chapter before going,
all Axiomes are ſayd to containe
neceiſary, or contingent truth, or
falſhood : and thereby 13 implycd,thar
exuth|
|
they containe fallhood,
{r. To all of tt, and al Rammns.
Ina neceſſary | wayes.
Axtonee the | 2. By ut (elfe, avd ef-
Coſequent ts | [entially.
' attraputedt Not oniy'to all,at-
| the Amtece- was, eſſerially
dent, 3.< But al's firſt, of
- Jtbe whole and en
L Crerchantide
N 2 _ We |
The art of Logicke,
cruthis contained in them variouſly,
even according vnto the differenc
kinde of Axiomes, In the 3 1: Chap:
ter, we hauec divided' Axiomes into
ſimple and compound: therctorc,we
mutt (now) ſer downe, atter what
rxpanner truth 1s m {imple Kantte!
andthereby finiſh-the precepts rou-
ching limple Axiomes, I thinke ir
ſufhcient to ſhew how, and in what]
calc, a (imple Axiome 1s necetarily
truc: forgthereby we ſhall know, how!
they containea contingent cruth ; and}
when wee ſce how they _—_
truch, we ſhall be able to judge how
—_—_—
———»
- "
_—_— - 4 "4 J |
—
- — — — —— "—— ——— - —
The Art of Logicke.
A
ani]
2. | Wefindethis precept taken our of
Ariſtoile,P ofter.l1b, 1.cap.4. 1h whuch
place hefaythchus, |
Toallsf it, not to
. ) ſome onely.
& To allythat i At all tunes, not
| at ſome onely.
I. As eſſential ther-
In anecceſſary 1. By it ſel pr WL;
Pr i ne ſeife, 2.the predicate is tn
» - wn p that is, of theſubieft.et comra
- V2 WE Pu, 5 4 3ellt "a of a*
OBFEECY.
the [ubrett, 4. Even for it ſelfe,
| not by accident,
| Of all .by ut ſelfe,&&
| - alt mit ſelfe,
| 3. Univerſal-< It doth de C firſt.
L +4, thatss Jmonſtrate )In e-
the ſubieft Yoery
part.
Jo Now, wehauethe nature of a nccef-
lary ſimple Axiome fully layd our,
| wee ſhould vnfold ſuth termes as
ſceme doubtfull : but wee cannor
doe
that }
g_
-»
y v
*
on, tw
-—-— —
_
ht..At. AM
The Art of , Legicke, : 18x
that in chis place: tor, here we ſpeake
of them, in an vniverſall noon, ab-
ſtraed from all ſpeciall kindes of
ſ1mple Axiomes, W ee ſhall come to
chem in the (ixe nc xt Chapters ; and
chen, we ſhall ſee the meaning, and
vic of thus gcnerall precept,
ESRI
CaH4% ARYV:
Of fimple Axtiomes, neceſſarily
true in ſpecial,
1g" OO
Axromes, are Diftribui 7
Doe not finde this precept, either
In Ren, or Ar;ftoule cxprelly,
yer I bring it by che auchority ot chem
both, According (0 Kam, cvery
precept of Art, 15a necetlary axiome 3
CD er ne ew
N ; __ they |
bur (according to him alſo)a Defint-
tion, and Diſtribution, are precepts
of art ; therefore, he muſt contelle
—_—
The art of Logtcke,
they bee necciſary Axiomes, The |
principles, and foundation of a de-
monſtration,are neceilary axiomes:
in che wdgement of Ariſtotle. Poſter.
{ib. 1. (ap.2. But a Definition 1s a
principle, and toundatton of a De-
monitratzon, even 1n the ſentence of
the ſame Ariſtotle, Poſter. bb. 1. cap.
3 3-4b.2.cap. 3. Thcrefore,according
to him, every Definition 15 a necel[a-
ry Axiome. Wee may argue the like
from his authorny,for a Diſtribution:
for he 1moynes him that makes a De-
finicion, co diſtribute the thing defi.
ned into parts. Top. 416. 6. Cap. 1.
and 1n framing his art of Logicke, he
makes Diſtributions to be precepts,
no lelſe then Definitions, Laſtly,
though I had nor their authoriticto a-
vow this precept, yet I _ bring
it : becaulea Defruwon, and a'Diftri-
bunon haue the nawre of a
Axiome, as wcſhall ſce when we cx-
amine them,
Cnar.
|
|
The Art of Logicke.
Cunare, XXXVI.
Of a Definition.
N chis Chapter, we mult ſce what
| a Definition 15,
A Definition, u 4 ſimple Axiome,
wherem we declare what a thung ts,
perfet. This cont eines
er
onely,
el $ the conſiutating can
A definition ts |
| imperfect. Tbs (ets out
the thing by other
arguments alſo.
The faſt, is a Definition properly, the
ſecond, is called a Deſcription.
|
His preceptis avawed by Arito-
tle. He makesa Defininon to be
double, in che thing, though not in
words, He (ers out the nature of a de-
finition, as Remus doth. A definition
(ſayth he) «# « —_ that frgnrfies
4
" »#
The Art of Lopicke,
—
EE — hl. — cc
what the thing is. Top. bib. I. (@p. 5
AA motsfication of the eſſence, and doth
explicate what a thing ts. Poſter, hb,2,
{ ap. 3+ 4 :
A Dcfinition thus ſet out, muſt
needs be a perfect ove, In the firſt
bookeot his Topickes,and 4. Chaprer,
he hath theſe words z There « ſome-
thing that is proper, that figmiſfies what
por $:4nd [ome ATR. 5 doth not
ſo fignifiee The firft u called a definition,
the orber 11 commonly called a thing
proper:when ut 15 attributed to the ſame
ſubieR with the other, Novy, in this
lacter place he ſpeakes of aDcfinition
that differs from the former. I Gay it
differs, 1. In the name, he ſayth, ths
name is but commonly given, he laycs
ion, the nature of thethjng defined
1 ſet out, and more t00 ; it 15 explica«.
ted by ries, that doe not de-
clare the efſence'2 and therefore, in
all theſe places together, be makes
one kindeof definzzion, that ſees our
thenature ofcherhing onely; and an-
bo
|
pot ſoof theformer. 2. In this defiri- |
© = LOO ,
« S > JS *. JO2 fy
. : - - [4 = "” +$ _
\ o . oF :
o % *
" \* { 4*
The Art of Logicke,
and conſequently{according cohim ) |
a dcfirurion 5s pertedt,and umperte&t:
and that in the ſence and meaning of
Rami, Thomas tercheth the ſame
rhung expreſly; A definsrien((ayth he) |
u either perfet4,or nwperjett that com-
prehends rhe totall bring of the thing,
| 45 5t 58 Coufiivied by all the egrſcs.
S262 | _ -
— OO. NES Im cn—_—_
This expreſſeth ſome of theſe, and di-
vers conditions alſo © andis called a de-
[cription. 2. diff. 27 q.1.art. 3. ad g®.
In his place we ſpeake of aperfe& de-
finitony and therefore vnto Thomas,
| will zoyne, Alaco ; in him T finde |
chele wordsz A good deſcription may
be connerted with the thing defined:
not onely for one difference of time z but
| for af! ries whatſoever: ſo aszthe pre-
| dicAte Canmor poſſibly be ſevered from
the thing defined. Yueſt de Reſwmpra. |
q 6. .2. vrcothem wo, I will ioyne
Richer dns de Savutto vittore : for, he
15molt full in cxplicating of a defini- |
| tion: De rrivitate. (ib. 4, Sa 21. fol.
| 108. That « defiition may be perfeft,
5: ought toco the totell 1, and
| onely eſſence rhe thing defined: op 4
—d——
. oo. —— _ ”
_
| 186 The Art of Logicke, | |
| #t borrowes its name from the thing, [o | |
#t ought ro extend it ſelfe ynto the wt- | |
rermoſt liewits of the thing defined. Nev- \ |
ther muſt ut exceed it, ut onght t0 agree
v1 all, and onely uns the thing deft-
ned, aud ſo farre, that it may be con-
verted ito ut ſelfe ; Thus farre he, I.
mightſhew the ſame out of later Au-
chors, butT ſpare thatlabour,becauſe
theſc, tor ther 1wdgement, may goe
in ftead of all ; ſuch is cheir learning,
and anitiquitie, Othersſay the ſame,
and none doc dilent from them,
2 By cheſe authorities we finde what
" [a definitionis, and thereby wee are.
reſolved, that a definition 18 a necella-
ry Axiome, inthe ſence layd downe
(@p, 34. and conſequently, wee ſee
how to finde out a definition from 0-
ther ſentences : and to twdge of the
ruth of i when wee haue found 1t 1
But beeaule all this doth (ſhew vs =
very ſecretgof narure, ( as I may lay
——_ cannot be — nea-
ther ſpeedily, nor calily : therefore 1t
will be very profitable z if I ſet outa
definition by other notes, or __
ft
oy mud _ : I
| NO ee OT TION
Q——_—_ ts ts RS
[8 The Art of Logicke,
187
Gat arc berter knowne to vs: that,
vhen wee haucthem altogether, thc |
| one will lead to the other : and both |
_— will giue vs certaine know- |
ledge of this roote, and original of ail
whereby we know (ingle termes 1n /
them felues, a5, 5Forde cales it :*Po- |
ſter lib, 1.cap. 3, Nos vero: and that
knowledge : yea of that knowledgr, | -
knowledg is no letſechen Angelicall.
Aviflotle hach done ſo much in the
thing we ſecke for,that the aſſiſtance
of any other anthors may ſeem need-
know apcafett definition: and left we
ſhould (orger, he ſhewes vs alſo, the |
naughtines,and faulcs in a definition,
he doth the firſt in thele termes,
I. A d:finuson 3 conſtituted of the
Genus and the differences: [op bbb:1,
les, he ſhewes v3, politwucly how to
Cap. 8, nemely the [pecificall differences
whoſe office it is to make @ difiuition
Compleat : and to deſigne that which «
more general! onto one [pecuall kinde :
and this it dath, by reaſon thet they ave |
taken from the proper forme of the
things differexiced, as the roote, and #v+- |
”—
— 2»
_—_.
ginal( |
—_ Fr” Re
The art of Logrcke,
| gevall from whence they flow: In eg
wdgement of Thomas. I.p.q 29 ,
"x6, I. diſt. 25. q. I. 47, 1,4
2. In a definition, the end TUEY
Fs thmg defined ts referred, is not to
be oonited. Top, bb 6 cap. 8.
3. A definition muſt be gniverſall,
and affirmatiue : Poſter lib, Þ Cap. 3,
4- He that defineth muſt v/e words
(/o farre as be can ) that ſhall be of
cleereft [ence becauſe, a definition us
mace for the getting of knowleag. Top.
1 wa in Skoring vp the
faults of an evill definition :; I will
' bring ſome of chem to fercher our
vndcerſtanding, I will not bring all,
leaft I be tedious, He referres them
vntorwo heads: viz. Obſcure, and
| Saperflaitie. The Obſcurnies are ſet
downe Top. 4b. 6 cap. 2.and they are
4 in number. Firſt, when the thing de-
fined ( thas admits divers ſences ) is |
not dſt ingriſbed. Secondly, when it is
expreſt "> a borrowed (peech, Thwd-
h, when any words are of. packer
MN
CET -
Thi rhe . Art of Logicke,
Cs
rudes and onproper, F omrthly, when
the definition 15 [o made, that we can |
| that 8s contrary toit,cr what the thy
\&, that ts defined : for then it is like 4 |
priture that cannot be knowne whoſe ut
#5, yules it be ſpewed by writing. The
' ſuperfiuities ofa d. fimition arc 6.He
| {ers them downe 111 the third chapter
net fird: how #t differs from —_
of the ſame booke, and theſe they are.
F ſt ,when one thing 6s repeatea often.
Secondly, when « defintzion 6s made of
arguments that in nature doe follow ,
and in our knowledge are leſſe knowne
then the thing defined. Thud'y, when
im the Fx. the thing defined ss
| brought : cap. 4. Fowrthly, if « /ape-
rior be defined by an mferior, Filtly,
| when more ss brought m the de frution
| then ought:cap 1.S1xtly, Emery thing #5
ſmper ſluons that may be taken away, yet
the reſt that rematue doth make the
thing defined to be evident; and declare
| the $0 thereof. ] will concede i in
| Ariſtorles words by theſe things wee
may /u ficiently know when « defloion
& right wade, and when it ts not.
_
rt — — g ll
C_ _
—
, ——
—_
—
The art of Logicke.
| ſhall neede to ſay no more to ſet out
| Top. lib, 6. Cap. 3. and therefore 1
the nature of a definition : or what
maner of truth 1s contained in it, Per-
| haps ſome man will require mee to
| ſer forth, when a defiruion contains
vntruch ; bur, I chinke chat requelt
| needles: becauſe every definition con-
; tains a necellary cruch that followes
theſe rules: and thatis yntrue, which
' doth nor obſeruc them: bur, com-
| mes che faults againſt them,
-. Alchoughcheſe things may ſceme
ſuthicient ro guevs knowledge of a
definition, and the necetlary truth
thercof : yer, [ thinke itvery needtull
| to ſet downea definition, atid apply
it tothe rules alledged,
e7 man ts alrying creature maned
with rea/on,
This 1s a definition in all mens
wdgement, Thatn agrees to the for- |
merrules, is very manifeſt , for here- |
in. firſt, Life, and Rationalitie arc at-
— — —
wbured to all meny and at allcimes. |
Secondly, |
— — 4a.
The Art of Logicke,
Secondly, They are auributed, not
by accident, or the application of a
third : bur, by chemſclues,in as much
asthe cllence of Life, and Rational;
| Fie ( even of 1t {elte) hath a relation
; vnto man 3 and wee apprehend the
| one, by apprehending the other,
| Thirdly, Life and Ratronalitre, are at-
| tribucedvnco man vniuerſally : that
| 15, not onely vnto all men, and at all
times: bur, adzquacly : ſo as, all chat
1510 Lyfe, and Rationalitie, 1s layd to
belong to man:and all that isin man,
1s denoted, and ſer out by &fe,and re-
larger.chen the other, Fourthly, They
are attributed vnto man firſt: that is,
| they haue noreflexton, or relation to
| any thing before man: neither is man
recepriue of any thing betore /ife, and
ratwonaluie :burgthe firlt aft thacthey
doe, 1s to giue being to man: andche
firſt bemg that man reccuucs 1s trom
lite, and rationalitie, g. Lsfe,and ratio-
nafitie, even ſuch asrhey are inchem-
ſelucs, ſuch retercnce they haue vnto
man:m fo much that man isno more
fionelarre : the one is as large, and no |
but |
-— _—__—_____ —
wu. — 'S
—
—
o
=
—_—
—_
The Art of Logicke,
| buraneffe compounded of life and
reaſon : and they no more bur an et-
ted rclolued intoall the caulcs : I fay
all the caulcs, for animalitic toyned to
rationalitie,comprehends all the cau-
ſes in it. Whereuponche thing defi-
ned, exceeds not the definition ; nor
the definition 1s larger then the ching
defined : but, they are convertible,
wee may truely lay, If man chen a I-
ving Creature inqdued with reaſon
If a living Creature indued with rea-
ſon, then a man z and both of them
conraine one, and theſame truth, |
Thus haue we done with the de- |
firution, we muſt come to a delcrips |
ciOn next,
-————
*%
—_ — .
—— — =__
|
teth our atk bing, even by other argn-
ments,
parues, as the Reader may finde
in the foregoing Chapter : theretore}
| we need not make doubr, wherher ir
belongs to this art or no. It 15 reaſo-
nable cleerc; therefore, a few words
will prevent all doubrfulnetle mit,
[ Arbang ] Tharis, thething deſcri-
bed. Now,chething deſcribed ſeemes
| tO be of ſhorter ſcantling, then the
thing defined, A lingular, or indivi-
duall ſubſtance may be deſcribed:bur
__— precept 1s apreed on by all x
' not:defined:for,fo we heard from A-
Frifotle mhe foregoing Chaprer:and
| he made ita law, thar every definuti-
| on muſt be yniverſall, bur char pro-
| polition where an igdividuall ching |
5fubjefed, is not vniverlall,
5 BOS. >, [ Other
The Art of Dogicle: 19
CHAP. XXXVII. | 0
of 4 Deſcription. | |
A deſcription Fi ſentence which ſet-; Rami,
ee —_ cm 4
—
* \ -
—_——
”
” a » - . pn yo
4
EINE an afturmatue =
"| Other Arguments] Theſe words
doc coritaine theformall nattire of an
impatcR definition, The word «r-
ation in a deſcriprion : for dit
ting arguments cannor deſcribe, nor
define: no notin the moſt vapertet
manner:for defining, how imperfeRt
ſo eyerit is, muſt needs import, that
the clung is in fome fort or other :
bur, diilenn ents doc not
feruein the icaft ſore vo ſer our whar
a thing is. They haucforce toſhew |
'whac a thing is not, and no more,
The word ecber,doth figntfie,thacthe
argumerits whercby a chang is dclcrt-
bed, are mixed: and are eiſen-
nal, partly 'without etfcnce.
Where wee muft know, thas, 'the
more neere ments be vito the
etſence, the more force they have to
ſet our the thing deſcribed': und'the
more truely chat ſencence wherein
they are predicated, may be called by
the name of a Defimrion,
Here it may be doubted, wheth&t
a Deſcription may be rmadeinuny |
Pe Em
.
EE EO IIS
.
.
EO IIS Þ
Ou
.
— — ww
2
hat pla
he.
Face?
54
thereisin ic, In a Deſcription there
is a neceſſary truth, I ſay neceilary
truth, not of confitatian x
proper to4 perfect definingn,
he chivg defined, and be definit
Py 69 as err |
fone ahiey according roche (cn
|
Thomers,3 Aft 25-4: b,477-1-
Os $ Y ad2®,)
195
|
aDnrC _——_—
-
li. am. _ -
—"6o Art of Loghthe x
*
—_——_—
4d '2®, J But, of emanation, effluence;
and conſecution in, a> much as, the ar-
Co ade atleaſt ) fo
Ay che Aeikibed, rm
hey me Glate coin '# 'therewith:\
pnxEIG oe
bur beo;for, if the pro;
to the ſpecics, or
y crhanations from the princi-
tnaur e,belongin ifgtothar kind;
1
| min tekinde, then they are ne-
terry
necetlaty vanrechradhes tho-,!
rough a pectin git and pol |
prone 5 1
thereby ena
precept' Will 'be' 1
deere. | HAT) 6.1 ( 228 £32 27
re,
| val ; fa yu} s 2}
A at bo th Sntoorhy rotors]
and capebeef' wage JON (
OY td Fanta) nievadfiratted|
from indrvidualitic} thites, notcons|
coo I
LY
—
En tand, =p
Cc ro
% FI
<
oY
>;
+
*
—— +4. "A %
— —— -- Wn
© >
N —
- .
*1}
. ,
VU
"* *
The Art of Logicke.
s deſcribed:all che wards that follow | |
F Verbe { is] containe the deſcrip-
Jar) s Theſe twoterms, Viz. mortal,
yah & learning, arc ioyncd to-
_—_ by that Verbe, 2nd thereby
be deſcription is affirmative. The |
| wud living {reatere is elſergll to
man: for; it 1sthe whole ſhoer, ( asT|
payfay) or comprehenſion of all che
parts b& his nature in generall. The
words capable of 4 learnin —__ a
thing proper vnto TnL tha
as he is formally his kinde of Cres
ture, which we call man: and there-
fore, that attribute-boxdreth next of
all co mans particular ciſence. The
word as Ys amporterh an Secidens
naw made proper to man, I ſay it is
'3N accident, 2nd no more z becaule,
i his nature. Mans realgnable, ſouls, is
633031] 113 3549792 |
[ous O 3 Mor-
| ic lowes not, from the principlcs of
| che chicfe thing ip, hisbeing;bur,
| ralitie lowes _ from that : aig 6 ©
ſouls is living,ſolaytb che Lords He
routed buſes
| Foy be became « tomy [enles, FER
BF. Fe |:
a ——
> © 7 —_ —
4 ©. -
I IE SIP >& ” —_
- 4 : '
' |
s
The Art of Logicke.
LE ——
f
i | —_———_—
; } [ 168
”: | - _ =
ponenbrgrn to ditlolucjori by
| There is aneceffary truth in this
| Mortilktic s now proper wallmen,|
becauſe chey all, are ſubiected to
deach ; 1 fay, un's 'wthem all;
not becauſe they doe;and muſt dye:
bit betaufe all of cherii, and none.)
bur chem muſt dye after chat ſort |
' (thar is) by iccidene, All other Crea-
| chat nature Which they had fron,
' Gold by Creation + but man is ſirb-
jet todaath by impolition;he incur-
red his- tmoreshtie when he (ined,
God threatnedit before man ſinned.
Geneſis. 17. and wflifted it when
than had [inhed, Row. 5.12. Bucthar
had neyer beche, if theprincipſes of
rhars nature had inclined, and fied
him to mortaltie, This being fo, we
may well conclude z mans mortalicie |
is very little diſtant from _ na-
cure. And conſequently, this propo-
(ition's aeinigch newhir vnpers
Deſcription: for, the ching defined,
arid that wherewich ed, are
| conyernble che {encence is equally
© ——
gue, |
ad. tt. * © SO TOEOR —
| The-Art of Logiche.
gue, which waycs ſoeveryourake is, |
ficberead as u lyeth, all men wall
ant i zif we invert the parcs, and}
lay thus, Every living Creature that i
| a0r tall aud of learning is man:
go man wall deny ic. Buc this truch is
par o1mmy wht ——_ and
capacice yngo learning ( as they are,
cagccivedby chem clues, and as they
arc inthemfelues) heug no ſhare in
mans eilencez but 8 A flow:
therefromzand were it not for a thir
thing chat comes berweene: them,
chey might, and might not, belong
co man any Wayes, This eruth is ne-
cetlary by emanaion, and conſecur;-
on: for, take man as he is a man, he'
muſt needs þercafonable, axheisres-
ſonable, hecannor but be capable of
learning:take bim as heig now a man,
- ww" muſt —_ _— : forghe
and God impoſed morraJjn
Ts)
|. Wehaucavothcrexample of aDe-
'|{cription, in the 2.Epiſtletothe Thef-
| falenians, the 3. Chapeer,and 3,v eric,
ag which fiuech this Ry well,
O4_ ot
—_——
-—_— —— —
"I
? * "4 -_
= S.
's —
bend
”-_
_ —_—_ I
"CET Ra. a, 7
" ett [0 I
Cars AN AER. 3
—_—_—
EO TEES — -
, 46 $—ed .- TY I
200+
The Art of Logicke, |
þ —
Ramns.
| 4: outlaw, fc. Now, all theſe be ac-
| Antichriſt (an individual ) «: ſazd 20
be a man of ſinne, the ſonne of perduion,
cidents,yetthey becomeproper vnto
him, im chat ſenſe wherein che holy
Ghoſt meantchem; and that defcrip-
tion containes a truth ſo necellary,
that we may certainely know, that he
15 Axztichriſt who 1s a man of france c.
in that ſenſe which the holy Ghoſt
intended 1n that place, This "hall ſuf.
ficeto ſer out the nature of a deſcr1
tion : and thus have we finiſhed r £
whole matter touching a Definition,
OED.
Cn ap. XXXVIIL
of 4 Diftribation,
enextching that comes to be
| handled; 15 a diſtribucion : thar 15
defined, or {er out in his one oteres
apprehenſion,
A diſtribution, 1s a fmple propoſition
where the whole is devided into;
|
pots. The
"=
——
hs, A
The Art of Logicke.
the par's. |
A part, uu that, which i contained of
the whole, |
Ariſtotle and other Logick,School:s |
haue left vs theſe preceptsalſo: as we /
ſhall ſe by the paruculars : Ariſtor/c |
firabuted trtoparts: Top. iib. 6, Cap.1
Ru [us wirwmgue, Ofc. Cap. 2. 1aem
Contenget, ev. Theretore ( according
to him ) a diitribunon 15chen made,
when the whole is dided into parts,
He ſayth further ; « whole i no more
but a gathering together of the parts.
Phyſicor. 1b. 1.text.19. 46,4 text 43.
And againe,7 hat i5/aydto be @ whole,
that wants wo part of that of which «t us
45 athing containing that which 53 con-
rammed: /o 45, they all doe make one cev-
Fame thing : meta. lib. 5. (ap.1 5. text
31. According to Thomas, that ws
whole, which is divided imoparts. 1. p.
q- 36.a7t,$.;ncor, Theſe Authors doe
not tell vs, what a partis concciveda-
BIO...
_—_
"The whele, is that which comtaineth |
requires, that the thing defined, be dv-|
|
ſand to be © whole : ether by nature, or |
<4:
' The Art of Logoke,
. | Theinegralicre whos (6 which the
{ ven) is confeiſedon all hands, ] wall
| x exnefeld, Vie Faruce/ally or 4 that |
ephes need they,for thats done ſuf-
fictencly already when they tell vs
what a whole is; andthe ſame thing
will bertcr appeare, when wee come
_ particulars : thorcfore I poo.
.q_:2.,: © Genus into the Species.
A diftribati-
\ Pariearee
The Genws,ie a whole thet is offentiall
40 the parts.
| inde nodillan berwerneany par-
ties touching this precepe; thas che
Genus, and che In he whales,
(andinhac ſence which is naw gi-|
allcdge Ariforie: A whole, fayah he,
meiabb.g.Copray Het 31:
exiſiensy,
v02;all, os an Integr o/l, 1. fog Joie |
j T,
SI
And Themes goes along with-hunz:
4 wbab(hyidhe ) ahboran ea - or
_ ——
mtr __——
— —
* Of!
WW) = fag &* » TOR _ WF
' | alledgedy theſeare his words: An vw»
The Art of Lygicke,
1.44 1®, Aceotdivg to Ariſtotle, An |
vniverſall whole, us alſo Equry«cal,, of
vnivecall, The kit, bf 1. the nam:
onely is common, but the rhyngs named
be divers : [04 men hinſelfe, and « [ul
tare is called « hung Creatnre.
lecotid, when the naxse 11 communn, and
the things named ave the ſave. Categor.
Cap. tr, Wetake an vniveriall whole
in this laſt fence, Now, Arsforle mn
theplace of his Afetaphyſcts laſt al-
|-dgcd, doth call ay a whole,
a$15 one to ever aSa living are+-
wure to atian anda beaſt ny like
ort ſpcakes Thowas in the place laſt |
—__— —
nver/all whote cs whe roevery party
according to the whole eſſence and yow-
er thereof as Creatrre, is 10 4
FT,
Wai, and a beaſt ; ob ne/oe « is
edicated properly of the pupulas arts
orig you als 77 Bo gin
pars either accerdiny to their whole
wor yerine,e yok nbeef mo
wages jo edicited of the be ſogele a |
weft.
OO CY
rr ps
—— —_— — —_—_—_— — OOO
ns 4
- nut. Datta... ts. _— ym ———
|
"s -
-&F
. , W
- > a s
— aa te Ra are *. SB Fs = = —
Ly % ws = v" en——_——_—_— — — — —_
a get iti ene Er er er er IR
| ' | 204 The Art of Logicke.
L | forle in the place alledged calls TS
BY whole, onething that ariſcth of the |
| | parts ; and thereby agrees with Tbo- |
| was:By theſe allegations we haue this
'f precept agrecd vpon, and made
Is plaine z therefore we may proceedto
| the ſeverall kindesof Diſtribucions,
ORE
| I Cunayr, XXXIX.
1 Of the kindes of Diſtribution, and
| it firſt of the Generall into the Spe-
11119 czalls, |
.
- . PO i Fant.
E I, | þ handling the ſeyerall Diſtaburti-
ons, it isnot greatly materiall,cither
to art, or thethingsthemſelues ; chat
we beginne with the one rather chen
'with the other: bur in my opinion, |
| the diſtribution of the Genus into' |
| | , | the Species ought to have the firſt] |
q place; becauſe ut is firſt in nature,and} |
WW - | obieftcd firſt to our vnderſtanding, |
being a comprehenlion of the parti | 2
| cular kindes ; therefore, I will begin
with that” The
. p % ; =Y
” *5 -,— Is : has
DE — —
an at
The Art of Logicke.
The Gennyts diſtribmred into the
pecies, when the generall nature
JpeciE
i divided, into ſeverall kindes,
Neither of our Authors hath this *
precept cxprelly : yer this place,doth
| require it, and their doftrine, and |
| praftzce avowes it, therefore, with-
| out further labour, I will proceed to
| the vnfolding thereof.
| {| Divided] This word is made
proper :o this diſtribution, by che
common phraſe of Logicians. The
meaning of it is, T he generall is d1-
'
|
|
vided intothe ſpecials, if weeinquie
how itis devidedto them 2 3t may be
anſwered; It is divided two rackey
' Firſt, In it ſelfe, being applyedvno, |
| maT I may ſay) beftowed ypon,
' each kinde: ( notin the totall lantude |
\chereof z but ſofarre, as one can re-
| ceiue it ) , Secondly, Each ſpecial
| kinde containes no more then 1s 1n-
{cluded in the generall, whar is explt-
| citly inany one of the kindes, is im-1
. - | plicitly inthe'whole: whatis dilated
| |nchar,isehruſt rogeherin his,
=
#
nc SIE LIE” EERIr ae —
——_——— wb.
[Severall
———
« uy
rr oo ggrer—gg—_— R— or I rr VC I DI_—_ CUI
| The art of Lagiobe,
[ S-perell kinder] The pars devi-
dedare called ſeverall: becauſe they
be ſevered by diftin& formes. They
are called kindes z becauſe both of
—_—
| becauſc, onc thing, is ioyned
ther;by avabe.l ſay gnegfor though
theſe diſtin&t tormesarconc, and the
lame chang inche generall, or vniver-
fall, wee thall leethe ruth, and evi-
dence of this precept ( thus vader-
ſtood) mchis inſtance,
A lrving ( reature, is either reaſoue-
__ warea/onable.
This ſencence, is a ſimple axiome z
| d-co ano-
the branchcs ofthepr ICALE,RETIVWO,
bang referred to chemiclucygyerchey
are bur one, when they are referred
to theſubieR. FO ns a
[Living | reature.| Is W HOI. UL
15 res 15an vniverfall whole,
3+ The parts inco whicb.t is divided,
arc realonable,& vnreaſonable Crea-
res. 4. This whole, 1s beſtowedyvp-
_
on boch pareszbecaulethe reaſonable, |
and vnreaſonable Creatures, {9008
O _
———. —————_
” -—_
E . : Fg > : : GT.
0 by = - C Y F :
s * A 75S LACK > " - —— 4
\ $ - : F #_-> ' , 6
- . ,
n es \ 4 | : : |
S$.--
A
'% Ws >
I -
Ti be Art of Logicke. |
207 |
ving Creatures. 5.Neither the vnuea-
fonabley, nar reaſonable Creatures
| | baue any thing ellentiall co chem
ye gs FP UK aa
for, that ward iuiporteth no more,
bur ſuch a things made by God, 25
hath life, and mouon.ink ſelfe, Now,
* -
that includerh a carparall ſubſtance,
W—_
the forme, informing ;the marcer :
T hat as the matter informed, The
* {reaſonable Crearpre har no more:
thus he hath a bodic azade liucly by
tus ule, andchat is che matcer infor-
\mcd. He hath aſoule, onlife, and char
15the forme inforaung, We findethe
like in the varealongbte Creatures,
they hauc a bodice, Wheyein their life
\FEmaines: chis Il ubftance1s
the matter informed, and that hte is
the forme informing, 6, Theſedoc
differ in cheir kindes, ( Iſay ) an their
| not numenicallygbecauic,
they hauedifferent kindes of corpore-
all ſubſtances: ſothe holy Ghoſt pro-
|
oftham apart) are truly ſaydeo be li- |
and aſpirirualitic, callediite; This 3s |
nounceth of them, 3, Car..45-.2ad
{o'
_ V ”_—- — —_— ——
Fo
The art of Logicke.
| ſo we finde by experience. The flefh
of manand beaſts doe differ mtheir
proper being, and Gods deſtination:
tor, the one 15 made to periſh finally,
the other torife againe, Thele Crea-
cures doe differ alſo in their life or
huclnes: the lite of beafts is no more,
' but as breath that dothvaniſh at their
' dillolution : Mans life is more: for,
. | hisſoule is life , being aliving, con-
tinuing, and fpirituall tubſtance :and
nodoubt,burthat ſpiniruall ſubſtance,
1sinformed by a huclihood, differing
therefrom (though our vnderſtan-
dings cannot bur ghelle ac it ) x. be-
caufe wee finde a _ —_ -
mans vnderſtanding, in
ſoule, differing from the ſpirituall
ſubſtance thereof. 2. Becauic mans
ſoule liucs whenit 1Sparted from the
body,
It may be ſome will obieR onthis |-
ſort zIf the ſpecies containes no morc
then is in the Genus, then cheſpecifi-
call differenceis alſo contained in the
Genus: but this laſt isnot true :there-
| fore, the firſt isvnrue alfo,
{
Iar-}
tet —_—
—__ —
'\ |
——_—_—
The Art of Logicke,
vpon Ariſtet/es auchoritie,and
alledged before in che poynt of the
| Genus, Bur I'deny the conſeqttence;
becauſe ic doth ſuppoſe, rhat the ſpe-
cificall difference, is a call being,
conſtitucingrche | np" is vt-
terly vnerue, It thac were ſo,thenit is
a caufe different from the mareer,|
forme, and end. Byt the- laſt is nor
true: andthis I take as granced:there-
fore, the firſt is yncruc alſo z andcon-
ſequently, the argument i fo too, |
| thatis founded theteypon. The ſpe
cificall diff-rence,zs a rationall entirie.)
and no more ;z namely, our vndger-
| ſtandings doc apptehendrhis kinde,
| bor layd rogerher. Now, this appre-
hen(ion is a veritie, no fiftfon: for,
it hach a foundation in the thing :
' namely, the ſpecificall forme, our vn-
derſtanding doth chus _ This
| hath one kinde of forme, that bach a-
; nother, therefore this doth ſprahi- |
; cally differ from that, And thus the
ro differ tro anocher, when they arc |
Tanſwer: I grancthe aſumption ;
02 areomen doth low from
che t _
—I—Y
210
"The Art of. Logiche.
the forme, it 15 not the ſpecificall
| torme it ſelfe. Huhettro wee. haue
ſhewed what arguments are diſpoled
inthis kinde of Diſtribution: andthe |
manner how they are diſpoſed ; now |
I will declare thatucontainesanecel-
| fary-ruch: and I may calily doc thar,
for.ic fully agrees with therules of ne-
| cellary cruch, ſ« downe (hap. 34.38
1 will, appeare by Jaying chem here=
VIALO, 3G bs 26549
x+ The parts doc belong to the
waoole, even to all of it, and at all
| times/3 there 15 no animahtic more
| then 15 comprehended in the Crea-
cures, #caſonable, and varcaloriable,
We cannot conceiuea time, wherein
| the Creatures reaſonable, and vnrea-
ſonable are not huing Creatures; and
therefore the firſt Rule agrecs.wih
this Diſtribution,
2. The Creatures,xeaſonable,and
| vnrealonable, are living Creawres, |.
| even by themſelues, and ther owne
| NatUre;there is no third thing thac
| comes betweenetheir nature,andthe |.
| natureof a living creature, that _—_ t
tne / *
—__ —_—
_—
oO oo EY <S, OY,IE "7
.
_ a
_
WO” Iv lee I — + x EY ot
The Art of Logicke.
che one belong to the other: bur, they
are ſo living creatures by themſclues,
chat the one 15 efTenriall co the other:
therefore, this Diſtribution aprees
with the ſecond Rule, |
3- The Creatures, reaſonable, and
vnreafonable,evenin thatching wher-
in they arc, they are living crearures ;
ſo alſo, even m that na:zure wherein
their being doch conliſt vniverſally, |
they areliving Creatures : yea, and
this their nature, wherein they are,
they are the farit ching in living crea-
tures z we cannot conceiueatty thing
in the ellence of the Crearutes, reaſo-
nablc, and yarcaſonable, that exceeds
the ellencevt a living Creature, Net-
| ther can weimagine, in any (1gne;or
moment of reaſon, that there 1 any |
thing in the efſence of a living Crea-
| ture, which hath the prioricic, or is
beforethe ellence of the creature rea-
fonable, and vnreaſonablz. I ſay be-
fore, either in nature, ortime ; bucin
the firſt moment wherein you con-
ceiue a living Creature to be; you
———
conceiue a creature, either realona-
P 2 © ble,
—
— —
IE
The Art of Legicke. ©
—
|
| "_— Creature,thenrealonable orvn-
ble, or varcaſonable: Wherevpon a»
nimalitic and theſe'creaturesare con-
uertible. All living creatures, concet- | #
ved as making one tocall ſumme, s! |
no larger in number, then the Crea-; |
ures reaſonable, and vnreaſonable , | |
and contrariwiſe,So alſo we may ſay;
It a Creature reaſonable or ynreaſo- | |
nable, chen a living Creature: Ita lis
onablc, And conſequently, all the |
lawes of necellary truth agree ynto
this Diſtribution, |
If any delire to know, when a DF
ſtribugon of this kinde, is falſe ; let| |
him lay it co theſe rules, and by them |
he ſhall know, If it agrees not with
theſe rules, but comes ſhort, in any
part z then it is falſe, And the more it
diſagrees from them, the Icile ruth
there is init, Here ] will end the di-
ſtribucion of the Genus, into che (pe-
cles. FEE,
——
| Caar.
_— nw * f :
we. "i J a? L #\ T 6% , : $F ” PR” P
RAE. SI " TE 8s Ws
wk ed 4 GEN oy > FS * 3 | + 4 , 3 = 5 a b
T. 1% & 0. » & "K 1 , k * 2 "I * l
—— 4 ® . *: 4 ” $0 4
: MK Le 3 <5
| The art of Logicke,
Cuae. XL.
Of the diſtribution of the whole
into the members.
& this Chapter we muſt ſce, what r
a Diſtribution of the Integrall into /
che members, is,
| The integrall i diftributed into the
| members, when the comprehenſine
whale ir parted betweene the things
| compre bended theres.
T muſt ſay of chis precept,asI did of - 1
che laſt ; The doArine, andpratice
| of Ariſtotle, and Remws doth patro- |
' nize it; therefore, we may take it for |
| a precept of art, though rhey hane ic
' notinlo many words z the opening
| thereof,will (ay, itcame fromrhem. |
| In this Diftribuuon: 1, The whole | 2 |
isan individaal, 2, That whole is ſe- :
vered into peeces, as the timber is by
4: | the ſaw,or wedges, 3. Theparts hauc
4M
Fm ops ems
EP hes 3 4 The
Mc Ip! ek —
The Art of Logicke.
4. The whole1s made by their mec-
ung together ; therefore this ſecond
kinde of Diſtribution differs really
from the former.
This one example will make the
ſence plaine, and'calte, -
Sole.
A man bath two ON)
| | Bode.
This propoſition is a (imple axiome;
for, one thing 1s, attributed to ano-
ther, Ifay one ; becauſe, both mem-
bers, viz. ſoule and body be oneinre-
ference to man: though they be p
ſtin in themſelues, x. Man 1s the
whole divided, (to wit) an indivi-
duall man, 2. This whole 1s ſhared,
one peice to the bodie, another to the
ſoule. 3. The body and ſoule haue
diſtin& individuall natures, the one
corporcall,he other ſpirituall.4. The
mecting of theſe two parts together,
doth make man, as he isan individu-
all whole : the foule in forming the
body, and the body being informed
by the ſoule. This ſhall ſuffice to ſhew,
what arguments be in thus diſtributt-
| on:
__
Go
—
—_ -_ - Y
wy? ©4 i ” | as <
- Sk... | - 3 LY ; 4 o voy "is Fq v - 4 GN I
OB PT YE REES Be 6 Oe ns
- PS Ee TEE "os 8K . >——_—_
i te ” \ *% - IS ; L -
4 CE oa EA ——_—_
| The Art of Logiche,'
on: and the 'manner how they. are
framed together, : © / [oth
- This kindeof diftributioncontaines
2 necel[ary truth : becauſe thelawes|
of necellary truth agree toit,''- i |
x. Soule and body arc affirfiedof
all men ſcvcrally, and ar altimes,
without exception.. '2. Bodie,:and
ſoule are reterred vnto a ſingular
man, by themſelues, and their owne
clTence: not by the force of anythird,
3+ The ſoule, and body, in whatre-
ſpeR rhey are,and inthe very elTence,
asthey arc:they are affirmed ofa (in-
gular man. 1 (ay affirmed, both vni-
verſally according tothe totallnarure
otchemſc]ues: and eecording to the
ellence of a (ſingular nian,, So as the
eſſence of a ſingular man, anditheel: )
ſence bf ſoule, and'bodie, are-of e-
quall extent: the one 15a5large, arid |
no leile large then the other; lo alſo, |
this their nature, 1s affirmed of man
inthe firſt inſtant, and moment of his
being,andour apprehenſion.W here- |
\Vpon this whole, and parts, are in '
their nature converuble. Thus wee
F 3 4
[
,
|
OT
The Art of Logicke.
| mayſay,lt a man,thenſoule, and bo-
die, It toule, and bodie, then a man,
| Theſe chings being {o, wee may vn-
doubtcdly lay, chus kinde of diſtribu-
tion conraines a neccllary truch ; and
therewithall pug an end ynto this
ept 1n hand,
precep
To conclude, I haue this to ſay
10yncly, of theſe precepts touching a
Definition and Diſtr bution : Sir
vic 15 not knowne to the negligent,
nor eſteemed of the 1 nt: bur,
hethac knowes them,and hath found
the benefir of them, will ſay, they are
worth the having : Tor, by chem a
man may know when a Definition,
and Diſtribution containe a necet[a-
ry truth z and an arnficiall forme:and
conſequently, he hath a good guide
to lead his reaſon in the right way
yntotrue knowledge, and the ayoy-
| ding of crrox. |
J
Cnar|
|
|
> — BESS
The Art of Logicke, TY 7
—_—_— r
Cnay, XLI,
Of contingent ſimple Axiomes, |
org may put a finall Concluſt- | 1
on, to all che precepts thar be- /
| long vaco {lunple Axiomes, I mutt
ſhew what arguments are diſpoledin
them, how chey are diſpoſed, and |
whart truth is contained in ſuch ſin |
ple Axiomes z as are neither definiti-
| ons, nor diſtributions z andcouching
them we ſay,
Ina ſimple axiome every argument | pu.
mo4y be diſpoſed, except full Compa- |
| rions, thoſe that conſent, are diſpo-
ſed affrmatinely: and they that dif”
ſent negatinely. |
{1 Full Compariſon; are witly excepted,
out of ſimple axiomes, becauſe they
conaine fourc termes diſtinAly layd,
the oneto the ocher, no wayes made |
one by any Conun&tion,
By argawents, 15 meant (ingle ar-
| a ES
- Ty
m——— stuD. .
—_
*_— Ka
|
_—————— EY
{|
0-2 yl -
__ , was 0g > = -
0 . = * $——
Og > CG ct) OE —————_. old
”
The Art of Logicke.
— — - — ——- -
guments,for all the foure cauſes toge-
ther, and el[encialt propertics, be-
long not to ſimple axiomes of this |
ſorc ; they are proper to definitions
and diſtribucions,
We ſhall finde neceſlary truch or
talſhood 1n all ſuch axiomes as pro-
nounce of aching either as it is in pre-
ſent beinggor 251118 paſt, I ſay neceſ- |
ſary truth, noclimplyzbur after aſort;
becauſe, the thing that 5s, or « not,
that was, or was not, cannot but be,
whenit is z nor but not be, whenit is
not:as Ariſtotle hath'trucly obſerved,
De imterpre. Cap. 9.
Simple axiomesthat pronounce of
athing tocome, containe a certaine
truth, or falſhood in reſpe& of Gnd:
for, he forcknowes all thingspolſible
by his ſimple intelligence: and all
chings that ſhall be, by hus intuition
or knowledge of viſion. In reſpe& of |
mans knowledge, none of thole |
Axiomesdo containeacertainetruth,
for vnto man; all: fucure riungs' are
contingent, and conlequently- mans
knowledge of them mutt negds __
RC
The art of Logicke.
be contingent: vnto Man lay) they |
are contingent: for as much as, their
next cauſes 'whervpon they depend,
are contingent, All humane ations
depend vpon inans will;as their next
cauſe, and mans wall 1s a faculnae tree,
and indetcrmined vmo- one ; and |
therefore contingent. All other things, |
not humane, are alſo contingent : be-
cauſe, their next cauſe may be hinde-
red-in their execution. Man 1s at
Gods diſpoſe, and all the other Crea- |
tures are at Gods, and mans; Theſe
axiomes may containe a contingent |
rruth,in reſpe&t of man,and that 1s all
he can haue of them, And here a fi-
nall nd for {imple axiomes,
I CALCATIC ALT IN CEEDI.
6 0 IS > + & | |
Ompound Axiomes come now
ture may be cxpreiſed in this propo-
| ſion
A
Cr
LS
of compound Axtomes in generall, |
to be handled; their generall na- | |
TT,
. # "I"
<—————_——————
no -
| 220
The Art of Logicke,
Rammas,
I,
| 4 conpenad exon that, the bend
whereof 65 4 contunttion, |
Fo oO _— and thus Ariftotle, i
Jpeec compounded of ſimple A xiomes,
6 made one, by « ron preps
pre-In which word hikacknow:
I-SOIME AXIOIMES are COMPOUN-
- ax10mes, 2, Such axiomes are !
ſy wr of (imple Axiomes,
They are made one ny char com-
on. 4- Their parts are tyed toge-
ther by a Conjun&ion: therefore, he |
delivers the ſame pr with: Re-
ms, and vnfolds the meaning ofit.
Thus farre Ariſtotle went; but ne-
ver further (for any thing thatI can
finde:) yet may we notlay therefore,
that his Logich 15 an im art:be-
cauſe it may be all his wrinings arc
not come roour hands , It that be ſo,
then eime, hath done 1 ke both to
him and vg, I thinkerather, he omit-
tedcom axiomes of purpoſe,
Ifhedid ſo, he had good reaſon for
i; forthe of ſimple axiomes
| giuebght cnough to ſhew ys how to
1 * a m_
jo ES
—
—_—
—_—
Neither inay weaccule Reway of afu-:
iudge of theſe : for theſe being com-
| pounded of chem,they muſt needs be
the foundation of theſe ; and conle-
; way he that can iwdgetrucly of
ledge, and vſcof this are more ealie,
ſuch axiomes as hecalls compound :
therefore, he might make che precept,
T. he art of Logicke,
221 *:
em, cannot be ignorant of theſe.
crfuitiein art ; for, reaſon'avowes
is deed allo z becaule, thele precepts
arc convenient, and make the know-
2. Learned men ofall ages haue vicd
of them to be parcell of thisart, ſcing
vic, and cxprrience is the miſtris of
art, Theone did, well in omicting g |
becauſc,heryed himſelfe to exatines.
The other did well tobringthem in,
becauſe, he regarded precedent cu-
ſtome, and future caſe, We will goc
with Rem alone; becaule, wecan-
not haue Ayiftotles company.
[ eAxiome | This word doth pur
vs1n minde, that, theſe propoſitions j
1. Hwucargument framed m chem.
2. They areframed in theſe, inafaſhi- |
on differing from {imple axiomes, |
from |
I
The Art of Logicke,
they had a-verbe ; cheſe haue a con- |
from whence they are called com-
ound, 3. T hey containe truth, or
| falſhood: for ſuch is the condition of
| all axtomes whatloever,
[ That | This word implycth, that,
a compound axiome; 18 but one pro»
polition, or enuntiation, as Ari/totle
calls i,
[ Band] This word giues vs to vn-
derſtand, that,in compound axiomes
we ſhall fndewo diſtin chings tryed
together : and un this, they 1oyne with |
{imple axiomes.
[ Contwnition | By this word wee |
know, the band of a connext axiome |
. . .
is, 2 communion: and hereinſtands a |
maine, and principall difference be- |
rween [imple,& compound axioms ; |
wnon, to tye their parts cogether,
Ina {imple axiome, we found a pre- |
dicace, and ſubic&t: incheſe,we finde |
parts ryed together, but no name for |
them : we muſt ſecke for thatin the
particular axiomes themſclues, This
1s another reall difference berweene
{imple,and compound axiomes: thus
farre, \
The Art of Logicke.
| generall is chus divided,
REP RRER
Cuae, XLIII,
Of a Copulatine Axiome,
[ Congre-C (opntatine.
| gene
A comporend «
" Connexise.
A x1ome 6s
farre, for their generall nacure. . This
|
diſerete.
Segrepatine
xe lh
' A Copnlatine ts that, the coninuttion
whereof, as ( opniatine.
THis Definition, doth ſend vs to
ſecke an cnuntartiue. ſentence,
whoſe parts are tycd together by this
word And, But a litle:labour will
| not finde it g yea,it ſcemes vnpollible
everto be found: for, this word,is ve-
ry vnfit ſo to.tye the parts of a ſcn-
I,
=,
The Art of Logicke.
tefice together, thay thereby one ar-
gument ſhould ſer outanother : and
wuth, or falſhood be pronounced: ſe.
ingit doth neither affirme, nor infer, |
| nor any wayes ſeruefor thoſe ends, Ir
may be, his Copulanue axiomes bee
contained 1n ſuch ſenrences as theſc
' be ;
Chrift dyed, androſt againe.
Without, ſtallbe dogs, and ſorcerert,
and murtberers,and whoremongers,
and [dolaters, fc.
Both theſe propoſitions be com- |
_ | pouhd, according to Ariſtosle ; for,
each of them is made one by a Con-
junQion: they nay be called Copu-
late, becauſe that Conjun&ion 15
Copulatiue, The ftorenamed axiomes
are compoundcd of fimple axiomes.
m_ firſt, of two axiomesz the other
ue, Bur (according. to Rem )
both of a. be ſimple, becauſc
their band is a verbe,Neither ofthem
a compound; for their Conjun&ion
» had:
——— y U A— —
el
F; The Art of Logithe,
215
=
P——=—— ——_.,,0 OC TY j_rT
ry cs not the parts of the propolirion|
| rogether ; for, it neher atfirmGs, one
interrestruth,cr talihood. It ryeth one
part of the Axiome togerher, and!
makes it one by che knitting rogether|
of diversparrs, and no more. It we
takea veiw of them as they lye, wee
ſhall ſee all theſe chings plainly, |
Inthe firft inſtance, Chreſt is ht
ſubieR, death, and reſmrrefiron, are
| made the predicate; both of thele are
| 1oyned together by the word And:
andchereby they are made ane; that
1s, not onething: bur one cruch roge-
ther, This one predicate, is referred]
vneo that ſubicR, by the verbe thar1s
included jn chem both, in the truch
ofthe thing, che firſt conraines two
ionic Cl Chrift dycd, Chriſt did riſe
from death, and we finde the ſame
ing iachem both, being raken apart, |
that we doc, when both the predi-
CateSarc put togerher 1 IKO ONEAXIOM,
when it ſtandsin due forme, thus :
The fame isthe caſe with the ſecond, |
ers, 1 dolaters, Lyers,e5c.
haxe no right to heaven, |
pb *W In
ts.
The Art of Logicke, |
|
Inthetruth of the thing, this 8a
(imple - xxiome, as the former was:
the predicate denvnatio, isreferred to
the lubicft #horemongers, ob. by a
verbe:the ſubic& contitterh of divers
parts, diſtin bawecne them ſclues,
Whoreniongers, | detaterr,&c.41\l thoſe
panus madeone by the word Aud.
I ay one, not in themifelurs ; bur in
the truth ofthis propolition, lo as, if
wee: referre damnation © thetn all
toynely, ic containes/ a cerrame reuth,
It that- predicate be. referred ymo
Whoremongers alone, Lyers alone,
&c, each one of them doe rohtainta
+ 1-6 609 certaine, and vixdoub-
'n hh Wor _®! 1+ G
A Contradi&tion 1s: made to this
kinde of axivint, by denying the
word Azd : for, thereby we ſay,
all che parts vnited cogether, 'do&e
_—_ vnto the orher party ©
which they arercfrerred, 9
ll The Art of Logiche.
mongers, Chriſt prot not deaths
1. pur an expretle Compadition. co
Uo body iheſobrams, thoſr be
falſe, If they be true, theſe he- alle:
but, this Concradiion is the _
| with fimple awomes : for,
the ſame "x9 cer
and the ſame
_ may conclude, theſe fentences
ound lauuc ptopoli-
| ce wondip tip dw hora bue furs
in; the eruch: of the
, If yaw rakethem, a2smendoe
beak them,then ln arccopound ;
Sotnn 15 deny
ONO ae mg rar
, Cnar. XLINL,
of eatinexe. Aviomss, |
A Conmext, axione comes poxts |
nawre whezeof may be thus.
(imngular fubicſt we
[{50ue... Q. 2 | FN
- 0 _—— _
ponies Umm — #
The Art of Logicke.
e An axiome, is then Conex, when «
{ onuexue Contuntiion iz the band.
thereof. |
; named: Ic 15 in frequent vſe amongſt |
| the parts togerher,that, they containe
This kinde of Compound axiome, |
is caſie ro be found, and fidy thus |
men, and the nature of it conliſterh |
in compolition. There are preſidents |
of ic that ſceme mucho differ, I wil |
propound examples of them both,
that the matter may be fully opened, |
1. If mths life we micy all our hap
pireſſe,then we onely are miſerable.
2. {frigbteonſne: be by the law, then
C Jil dyed in vamne.
Theſe propolitions are compound
( according to Ariſtole and Ramn
coo) for, each ofthcm are made one
by a conwun&tion, thatſo tycs both
ſuch truch,as the parts doenot, when
they are taken in ſunder,and each gne
by ut ſelfe, Secondly, They are odm-
pounded |
The Art of Logicke.
pounded ot imple Axiomes, In the|
6, we haue thile two: firſt, All our
happines 15inthis life, Secondly, We
onely are miſerable. In the ſecond
we haue the like, Furſt, luſtice is by
the Law, Secondly, Chriſt dyed in
vaine. Laſtly,thele 2 (imple Axiomes
| ae made one propolinon,. by the
coniun&tion /f, and Then, I ſay they
are one, not by mixture, but by voyce:
chat pronounceth the latter certainely
to be, wherethe former 18,
led (ondirionall, 1n che common
phraſe of the $chooles zbecaule, the
Grit pare isput Conditjonally,no ab-
ſolucely : bur ( I chinke) theterme of
Connex, is more fit; becauſe, thelat-
| ter part 15 infarred from the former,
| and thercfore it is made to haue a
| being rogether wich he former: and
conſequently, it is anncxed, and knit
; yntothe former,
The parts knit together in this kind:
| of 4X1Oines, are named Amecedent,
| and Conſequent > and they are ſo In
Theſe compound axiomes, are cal-
chemi; for, the firſt in pon
0. - "0G
g ng Mc
: * - 7 nas
The art of Logicke,
ns ——_ FCS IEEE
ih.
| | taines, is moſt tertame, and-vndoub-
che fir{tin nature, and our appreheh-
fiomehcir could hauenoforce tolm-
ferre the ſecond. The ſecorid foHlowes
the firft, and rccemes1tS being there-
from: All arguments may be'diſps-
ſedin this axtome, that haue place 1h |.
»(impleaxiome:becanſe, this ſerueth
to conclude all queſtions,tharmay be
| concladed 'by a {imple axiome: fo
alſd they my be diſpoſed inthe ſame
| mtifer;in'this, tharchey may in
ſimple, ( that is) Conſeming argu-
| ments affirmatmuely, and Diiſenang
'negatitzely.
1 The truth of this axiome dependeth
vpon the Connexionof the parts;
ſo as, if the one doth follow ypon
the other,then theaxiome is true ;
otherwiſe it isfalfe,therefore,ifthe
one doth necetlanly inferre the o- |
ther, then the truth of ir is/alſone-
cellary, If the one dothinferre the
other Contingently, then it con-
taines bur opinion onely:or a Con-
angent au
The inference, that this rule con-
red: |
authoricie tor this
may conceale nothing,chat may giue
that the Conſequent follow wpon the
be the adequate Canſe of the Conſe»
E4 The Art of Leigicke.,
.
ypon in the Schooles, I will avow it
by ewo Authors of.-Credir, and they
than 15 Gregorie de Arim 11h. 1.d5ſt.41
q. 2. art. 1,11 decrſio queſtion, ( onds-
tonall/perckes may be ire, and theiy |
parts falſe. Thee are his words, and
they imply,that, rhe quch of Condi-
tiortall ſpeeches, depends vpon their
connexion, 9ot their parts. The ſe-
cond 1s Alvarez de Anxily:s diſp.72.
n®, 5.ad 3, There us required wnto
the truth of a Conditionall propoſition,
Aumutecedent. Whether the Antecedent
quent , or an effe&; thereof, or a Condi- |
tion preſuppoſing another { auſe. It it e-
| nowph, if the Conſequent followes by |
vertne of that ( ondutton, Thus farre
his words ; and they are (o plaine,and
lo-kaHll, thar, we can require no more
100: yerrhat],
entotbis maine, and important
C
|
rule, { willproceed alideSurher, |
| ARS ke #29 _Wwe: tad
red: Th antecedent partof it, isagreed
ſhall be 1n-ſtcad of all. The firſt of |.
W | |
" The Art of Logicke.
—
Rig AIG: el ol AO. i DAI. rt arr rin ne” 2 dates '
0 On eas ——_—_—_ clo gg ern mg et :
—— — CC
oO _
—-
Whew
ab Uber > co Se > -
Me ee i ed EE ECD
”"—_
oO AND b oo bt ene vo ener, SS. ks aa Acne rw
We muſt vnderſtand : The [[/ation
or { onſequence of «a Connexe,or Conds
tlowall propoſittony 1 entbey formall, or
materzall. | he lentencesalledged gut
of Gregory. and Alvarez, are vnger-
ſtood oftormall {lation. Now em [uch
there 11 alwayes @ neceſſary truth, and
no contingency. A matersall [iation s,
when the conſequent goes with the An
tecedent ; yet /0 as it followes the [ame,
wot by force thereof, We finds theſe pro-
poſitions im conairionall promiſes, and
an the tndgements that wee gine of fu- |
tare thmgs, that depend pon the ltber =
tic of mans will, Theſe [ilations bring
pronounced by God, kaue alwayes a ne-
Ceſſary veriuie : for, he cannot deny b1w-
ſelfe : therefore he keepes his word luſt-
ly. Mans will ts ſnbiefled to Gods do-
munon, therefore be will determine it |
to one. His power u infinite, therefore
be Cannot be defeated: but theſe propo-
ſition; being pr onouncead by mangdoe con-
tae (atthe belt ) but optnion, comtur
gent, and conie iuyall knowledge, Thus
much out of eAtveres de Anxigs
diſp.7 %,7.0 6. And Smaretsy _
A s ©
—_ —
Fn <0 | r— IC”
This ans 3s very. needfull, for
The Art of Logicke.
hb.2capi5.n%.8.cc, WheretheReas |
der (hall finde theſe things proce
and vntolded co the full, |
A contradi&tion 15then made to ths!
2X:0m:c,when the Liacion, or con- ;
ſequence 1s denyed: and wee doe |
that, by ſaying, akhough he firſt
be rrue, yet the latex 15 not true 2
bur more plainely, and dirc&ly,
' whenweſay,thelaterfollowes not
; ypon thetormer,
thereby we know how to apply an
anſwer for the refuration, and dif-
proofe of ſuch a propoſition, By this
alſo, we know what we mutt proue,
when wee would avow a connext |
ax1ome: namely, not the parts them-
ſelues z but-the following of che larer
vpon the former. It thus'oppolition
oa connex axiome may with reaſon
be called a contradiftio-10 any fence,
then inthisart it may. goe for a Con-
cradidtion indeed : but I doubt whe
ther inreaſonit may beſo called'or )
no; becauſe, the whole band thar
| youu parts ofthis amiome together,
A
Sly AMI 197 23 EE ©
pu
_ —
—_
The Art of Lygicke,
is not denyed : 20d Conſequently,
there is not an oppaſition made of one
propolition vato the ſame
on; tor one thing 1s not ſevered from
that{ubiet, vnto which it was 10y-
ned: bur onely the ſame thing 1s de-
nycd to follow, which was once af-
Graves to follow ; and-theſe things
may ſuffice to ſer our the nature ot a
CONNEXT AXIOINE,
Before I make a full end ofchuspre- |
cept, I muſt ſhew what athoiuc, or
{rather foundation, a conncxec axiome
hath veith a ftmple. I may trucly ſay,
atimple axtome,andthis compound
differ noching but m the manner of
pronouncing. Mon viually ſpeake 1n
2 conncxe forme, becaule the manner
5 more fanuliar in many things: bur
SY ſhould {pcake inche forme of a
UM EO —m_y
cherehare, we may reſolnechelc no |
them: as will hes by the grant]
alledged.
The firſt cxamplc c.of a COMET |
2xiome, viz. {f ws this fe enely Oe. |
may bercducedvnoa imple axiom |
—
rr OR
(imple axiomc, inthe cxa@nesof art: |
in R
; TOUS TETER
_— — - OO ————
| ther 1t may be ſo reduced orno: be-
L becauſe, the Connext 2xiome doth
The Art of Logicke.
235 |
rurh, it is fomewhat difficalt whe-
cauſe, ir pronouncech cf ſome kinde
of men, not vniverlally of all: yet
may be done truely, and plainely, if
we firſt know, that the antecedent
words: They that hane no bappineſſe
but ws this life, and b:ye they bane noue.
I fay,thefclaft words muſt bc added:
ſuppoſe them,andtherevpon inferres
couldnor doe. Thofe words bang
added, we may bring this Connexr
axiome, and the Apoſtles whole di
purationtherefrom, into this ſimple
forme,
They thet have no happine (ſe but wn
thus life, and bere, they Hae none,
they onely are miſerable.
'But we onely are net miſerable.
Therifove we have ſome bappineſſe
whith is not i this bfe.
in every mans judgement ; becanſe, |
| it hath bucthree tertnes mn 3 bur in
parr ought to be ſer downe 1n theſe |-
che Conſequent : which otherwiſex |
The
| 236.
The Art of Logicke. be
| Apoſtles whole diſputation together,
peare, that, they are fundamentally,
| The other Connex: propoſition,
VIZ, If righteowſnes be by the e5c. 18 yet
more dificul : yealo difficulc, thar,if
wetake it as1t lyes, 1t 15 not to be re-
duced vnto aſimple forme: far 1t con-
taines two propolitionsevery way di-
fin : and tnerctfore, it hath foure
termes, VIZ. 1. Reghteomſnes. 2. Law.
3+ C brsft. 4.V ae : butif we take the
and frame 1t according to art, ut will
ealily make a ſimple torme : for thus
the Apoſtle diſputcth, |
They that maintaine thu ſentence,
Tuſtice comes by the Law, they muſt |
" wvainigine this [extimce alſo, Chritt
| dyed im vane.
But no man may ſay, ( briſt dyed in
Vane.
Therefore %0 10841 may [a 3 Iuſtice |
Comes by the Law. |
To conclude this point of Connext
axiomes ; I hope it duth now ap-
and indeed no other bur __ |
.Ther
EE
3
mu
(== |
|
|
|
axiomes, and Conſequently,they de-
| that I proceed to a Diſcrete Axiome,
The Art of Logicke,
Therefore whatſoever belongs vnto |
chem, 1t is due firſt vnco (imple
riueche ſame from chem. They differ
onely in manner of pronouncing
and nut otherwayes, It is now ime
CN ORs
Crnae, XLV.
Of 4 atfcrete Axtome,
_ natureof a diſcrete Axiome |
is opencd inthelc words, & |
Thet i vinwe is dirs; able
hath a aiſcrete Contmnttion for
the band thereof.
The Axiome now defined,is of no
| leiſe frequent vſe then che former,
nor is it letfe victull, in che common
converſe of man : therefore ic 1s well
worth our knowing,andconlequent
ly this precept doth well deſcrue a
——_I_ —_—
-
— <———_—.. _ conan re On —_— "——y
- 2 ” — RY
I A N l
E :
=
_m_
P n C
* » y .
n 5 +* , ” ie
bY 471 { g * «de of
| | « * Th 4 * Pr"
\ uh | % "y & y
Wy? ———— \
. eg >. ho awn-ead — NIE
_ —
,
«
The Art of Logicke,
place in Art. Wee ſhall vaderſtand
x the bazer, if we pur an inſtance or
two, There bee dittcrene kindes: of
this alſo z 1 will propound onc of
each, that wee may be che beter a-
I Thewgb / walke in the vale of
death, yet 1 will nor feare ill, P[al.
23+ 4-
2. Ahlboxgh thog beldeſt faft my
name in the time of| perſecutio, yet
thee art geiftic of many fanits. Reo
vel. 2.13. 14- ; 971
ae com Amxomes 1n
the udgement, both of and
Arifletli:for in them, two (imple.
Axiomes are ioyned togethes by 2
coniunions and thareby. each of |
= Sh PRETTY — [ (ay one |
ſentence, intheir voyce of pronoun
cing, though che conjunfon doth |
chruſt the parts one fromangorher; for |
theſe ons doe ſay, hee” that
end centacaſes
cond : and tharcby pronounce. bue
| In
— & —
-
The art of Lygicke.
In theſe Axiomes, dilſemng ar--
guments onely are dipoſce and dil-
teningly inthe ſame manger as they
are diſpoſed in limple Axzomes: tor
' What can be ſevered from the ſub-
ieft,bur thoſe arguments that duJenc
from it. The
' can haue noname : becaule, ic con-
parts of this Axiome
tajnes nothing that doth antecede, or
follow ; vnletſc we wyll giueit choſe
names which belong co a (imple Ax-
ome. |
The contunftion which tyes the
parts together, 5 called &/crere < and
in this place it umports. No more bur
a thing chat kcepes ewo aſunder, for |
the preſene;thac,ar another cime nay.
meete together, If weexaminethefe
two examples, wee ſhall eaſily vnder-
fand therule, In the firſt, wor fearing |
of it; isdenyedto him that walkes i®
' the vale of arath ; nor (imply and ab-
folutely,asif no mancould ſo watke,
and feareiit; bur as athipg which was
| ſevered for chattime oncly , or that
didariſe vpon char occalion. In the!
ſecond example, the ve fenmes Jon,
| difticultie > |
w XL %. : ”
& 2? WELAS Ws, Ss
.
The..Art of Logight.
F F | difficulcic : becauſe. confifteth one-
-..:] ly of conſenting arguments: for a cou
| | ftan profeſſion of fauh, and gyurimnes of
| « fax/t, arc attributed to.onc lubic&:
Theſecond example, is hkethe brit,
| | if wee frame ic exadtly-according to
% Art; it will hauetheſe wordes,
Tx | eAlthough thou didſt well wn
- "theſey yet thou diaft not well tn
7 a ſome ether things. Tx
THIS | 5. | - . In this! propolitiony x/{. dog in
Sh. #7: | ſome things, 15 autribured vnto a well
| F, | : acerin ſome other things: bur theſe
7 £38 xwodifferonly in refpcet! ofthe pre-
18 ſent irne; andtbofe parnes, they dif-
''2Y | | fer not-:of thei owne/! nature, For
4. cheferhardidull in fomothing,mrighs
S | CR dQ $52.00
oe Np «4 beretindvaenke > lads vr to bee
. .iynegif both parts (1000, Bnf good, |
wy berh "—_ be divers.
{Gord} That is 1$1n reſpeſt of the |
þ 6, FALA A- diſcrete Axiome 1s then |
| | | tramed according to: Art, when the
Pparzesof it doc diflent by —_—
| | F | not |
«
The Art of Logicke.
241
not as oppolites, This rule muſt bee
vnderſtood of ſuch Axiomes, 3s: are
moſt agrecable to Arr, and in that
ſenceir>moſtcrue, Ifir be vnderſtood
vnuyerlally, it is not true, IE T ſhall
lay, a/tbough ! am rich yet 1 am not
poore. | (hall trame my diſcreriue Ax-
1ome according to Art : tor Ifever
povernic from reches, noc ſimply, and
every Way : bur onely as ROY
from, or bearing company w!
Ct
ches: and that 1s cnough to as 4 ir
a formall diſcrete Axiome ; becauſe
| this ſcrues for no other end, bur* to
takeaway an illacion, and to ſever!
a thing falſly inferred, from therhing
char 4d inferre' the ſame, Such an
Axiome 15 ridiculous | granr, burin
him'chac would have riches, and
yerrie goc rogether, nor in him that
denies Geir going cogerher,
|. [| Bothpertserme ] Thus rule holds
in every diſcrete Axiome whatſo-
' ever, The Axiome is talſe, vols both
arts be true ſome wayes or other :
he orin every Axio me of this kinde,the
firſt part is let palle as rue. In ſome
| R Axiomes
4
— —
| —————_————
The Art of Logicke.
—_—
Axiomes1tis ſo indeede, and ine
ching : but in ſome other it s ſoun
Theſccond part muſt alwatesbetrue,
otherwiſc u denyes notthe mterence
oppoled thereby : and therefore it |
pronounccth not as thething 1s. The |
examples formerly aleadged, wall:
make the matter plaine, In the farſt,
Dawid preſumes, that, hee did wake
through the vale of death; and lo hee
did indeede: yet hedenyes, thatther-
by he was made to feere 5/l. the had
fearedill, then hee had pronounced
fallcly. If neither hunſelie, vorany o-
cher had prelumcd,thatyhe did walke
in the vale of death 5s ten ( for that
alſo ) he had pronouncedfallely;:for
1n both theſe caſes, hee had pronoun-
ccd otherwiſe then the thing was 1n-
deede, The Apoſtle P gvl 2, Cor. 11
6.1 content to yeeld his accuſers,that,
he was rwde in ſpeech: yet hee denycs
thathe is /o in knowledge. The frit
is true by. concellion onely ; not 1n
the thing : for his ſpeech was excel-
courtelic onely : not in the thing. |
lent, both for- Logicke, and Retho- |
ricke,
——
; a ont err et on en rn
| The art of Lopicke.,
tations doe witnelle, The ſecond is
true indeede, otherwiſe he had made
no anſ{were tothem chat argued him
ſlenderin knowledge : becauſe hee
Was rude tn ſpeech.
Hucherto 1 + 4g opened che nature
of diſcrete Axiomes, it remaincs
that I ſhew how they be ſupported by
a ſimple Axiome. Touching thar I
ſay, In the ching it 1s no more bur a
[imple Axiome, as the yce1sno more
| bur water: for Art will refolue theſe
Axiomes into limple, as heate,. and
|raine doth dilſolne the yce; The firſt
example 1s no more bye as ih Diewnd
had ſayd, throng bthe 12ala ef
hath aidoks feare wr, "p pat. ate |
43es goe together. In rhe (ame onr;!
Pax anſwers to his acculers:: Rude
ſpeech and ſlender knowledge, ara not
| Coms . Hereupon wee may con-
: difcrexiue Axiomes, are coft-
poundeds they are pronounaed:but |
þ nay are{imple as chey oughc to bere-
| ſolved: therefore whatſoever belangs
toaſimple Axiome, appertaines to
ricke, as his diſputation and d exhor-|
'chemallo. R 3 CHnare.
C
0 OOO ———_— —_ — _ __—
*
The Art of Logicke,
| Os 4's XLVI. ;
|
this inſtance;
Of Disiunct Axtomes.
; | hovem; laſt place we muſt come to |
"| Kh
e precepts of a disjun& axiome:
and that may be thus defined,
That akiome is dirinntt, whoſe band |
i, a distunttine ( ontunitton, *1|
Theſe axiomes are ſcldome in vie,
and when we findechem,they arcra-
ther diſputacions by Syllogiſme, then |
lingle ſentences by themeclues, pro-
nouncing truth or talſhood : yet not-
wichſtanding, I will vntold their n+
ture, that we may haue atruc mdge-
ment of them. We may ſee thar, in
Either Saml ſpall line fer ever, or aje
by Gods hand, or the enemies ſword,
or the courſe of nature, 1. 54M, 26,
IO,
| This ſentence is acompound axiom,
boch|
V—E—_ _——_———— — —
tyed togerher, and made one by a
Conunttion,
This ſentence alledged,js a disjun&
axiome ; tor the band that tyes the
parts together, 1s disjunFue, Pexpe-
tuall life, and death at Laſt, arc atcri-
butedto Saxl: one of them certainly,
neither of them diſtinAly, but both
disjoynedly,
Oppoſites onely haue place in this
axiome: for none may be disioyned,
orthruſtche one from the other, bur
ſuch onely as in their nature cammot
agreetothe ſame ſuvic,inthe ſame
reſpe&, part, and time, |
The truth of theſe propoſitions, 15
meaſured according to the oppoſites
diſpoſed in chem ; if they containe
| ſuch as one of them muſt be in the
ſubie&t, (and arc allo) wichouc athird
thing cocome berwecne them, then
' the propolicionss necelTary,thorough
| the oppoſition of the parts: the cx-
Al.
%
| ample now alledged is of this kinde
| Perpetual! life, or death at L:ſt; one of
| R 3 them
The Art of Logicke,
both according tO Ramus,and A
ele: for divers (ingle propoſitions are|
The Art of Logicke, |
O>oe<dS RA + = T7 Es ei 68 <P 4 eta
Edie Las we "_— ant. ws = w da - m_ _
- : —_
.
a fR XL V1.
|
; | brane laſt place we muſt come to
— —
|
Of Disiuntt Axtomes.
.
the precepts of a disjun& axiome: '
|
|
| and that may bethus d:fined. | |
That akiome is dlizinntt, whoſe band
is a diriwntline (ontunition, - |
__
Theſe axiomes are ſcldome in vſe,
and when we finde chemythey arcra-
ther diſputacions by Syllogiſme, then |
lingle ſentences by themiclues, pro-
nouncing truth or talſhood : yet not-
withſtanding, I will vntold their na-
ture, that we may haue atrue wmdge-
ment of them. We may ſee thar, in
this inſtance 3 |
Either Sen! ſhall line for ever, or ahe
by Gods hand, or the enemies ſword,
or the courſe of natare, 1. 54m. 26,
IO, |
This ſentence is acompoundaxiom,
both
=.
> ted. ds "4.
The Art of Logicke, 245 |
both according to Rawmmwand Ariſfte-| |
ele; for divers ſingle propoſitions are |
tyed togerher, and made one by a
Communion,
This ſentence alledged,is adisjun&
axiome ; tor the band that tyes the
arts together, 15 disjunue, P cxpe- |
tual life, and death at Laſt, arc attri- |
butcdto Sex: one of them certainly, |
neither of them diſtinAly, but both |
disjoynedly, |
Oppoſites onely haue place in this . |
axiome: for none may be disioyned, p
orthruſt the one from the other, bur
ſuch onely as in thewr nature cammot
agreetothe ſainc ſubic,in the ſame
reſpe&, part, and time, EN,
The truth of theſe propoſitions, 1s
| meaſured according to the oppoſites
| diſpoſed in them ; if they containe
\ ſuch as one of them muſt be 1n the
ſubie&, (and arc allo) wichourt athird
thing ro come berwecne them, then
' the propolitionas necelTary,chorough
| the oppoliuon of the parts: the cx-
ample now alledged is of this kinde ;
| | Perpetual: liſe, of on at [ſt ; one of |
3 . them
p—_—
AF EF
The . Art of Logicke,
| thern (1 fay ) mujtneeds befall Fowl,
theſe two have no chird to come be-|
rweenethem, rhterefore 1t cannor be
avoyded: but he nmit ether liue per-
petttally, or dye at laſt, It wee will
Concradit this propoſition, we muſt
ſay 1 Sax! ſhali neither Ime for ever,
nor dyconcet this 1s neceflanly talſe;
becamfe, cheother isneceſſarily rue.
| Tt a d5junctive propoſition con-
raine ſuch oppoſites, as one whereof
muſt bein the fubic, and rhe layd
oltes” haue a mecane berweene
chem, thenthe disjun&tion is necef
them be ſufficiemly reckoned vp ( as
for example ) This aon # either ſw-
| vill,or naturally good,or naturally evull.
Here we have a neceflary truth, be-
| govd, or cvill ; andthereis no other
| thing comes betweene ſupernaturall
| good, and ſupernaturall evill,bucn+-
rural} good, or naturall evill, The
Contradiction of this disjuntion is
made, when weſay, there i ſome 0-
ther
* K
— =.
_—
fary;when as all that comes berweene |
|
pernaturally good, or ſnyernaturally e- |
caufe every a{tion of man is either | |
" * The art of Logtcke,
ther thing enar comes betweene ſu-
permrturall good, and (upernaturall
evill: beſides naturall good, and na-
curall evill,
If I makea disiun&te propofition
thus: Socrates, ts efther,a Father, or a
{bilde:theanthis propoſition containes |
a conieture, cr opinion, no necela-
ry truth : for it might come to palle,
thathe wasno father, becauſe he hath
no childe ; nor no childe, becauſe he
hath no facher. Thus (I hope) the
nature of disjun& axiomes, 15 made
plaine cnough,
Theſe axiomes doe ſavour noleiſc
of chem that be ſimple, chen alb rhe
former compound axiomes -haue |
done, Theſe are compound 'm-the
words cars they are vttered: but
they arc imple, incheſenſe wherein |
they are ſtogod. T he examples
ladgrd cu be thus reduced 5; He |
that muſþ once-dyz#, ſpall wot fine for c-
ver. That atlion, that us ſwpernatar ally
Lood, is ether naturally goog, nor na-
pn evilt, nor a patron fer
one me 'miy* conchide,,
R4 wha!
— —— —
248
The Art of Logicke,
Ramins,
F
whatſoever belongs to a (imple
Axiome,containung theſe arguments,
the ſune belongs to disjun& axioms,
Now at the laſt, we are come to an
end of all Logsca4 precepts, that con-
cernethic making of axiomes.
C x.a 2; XEVIL,
Of.a $ plegiſme,
| this place we muſt come to the
precepts, which teach vs, to diſ-
poſe arguments 3n a Syllogifne, and
co Widge of them, when they are diſ-
poſed:
A Syllegiſme is a diſcomrſe, wherein
the queſtton, « ſo diſpeſed with the
Argament, that if the Antecedent
be granted, it mmſt neceſſarily be
concluded.
This definition 25 (ſet downe by 4-}
rifotle, almoſt word for word Fad
—_
|
The Art of Logicke, 249
thusſaych he; A Syliogiſme us aſpecch, |
wheretn ſame things beg placed, ane« |
ther thirg differing from them, doth |
neceſſaruy joliow from them that are [0
placed, { op. lib. 1 Cap. b. Prior l1b. I |
Cpl. Elinch. Cap. I. |
[ A Syllogi/me | This tcrme 15S bor- | : , 3
rowed, cither from accounts, whee- |
in many particular ſummes arc ad-
ded together,and thercby made one
otall, or elſe, from many ſentences
being diſorderly placed, or brought
into one briefe, or breviate; therctore
it ſeructh well for this place: becaule,
the nature ofthis diſcourſe may true-
ly be reſembled vnto cither of them.
[ Diſcomr/e] This word ſcts out the
general] nature of the thing defined,
Ariſtetle calls it a ſpeech: and both of
them doe mcane the fame thing:
namely, many axiomes ſo placed co-
gether, that one is, drawne out of ans
other, I ſay Ar;ſtotle meant thus. be-
cauſe, the reſt of his definition {forts
withit, And he calls the precepts of a. |
Syllogilme, Dianonticall Dotirine,
Pofi.lib. 1.cap. I» -
TH ; [2x |
m—
Y «<
"nM
k A, 4 . -
» a 3 r ,, LY
Ta ' A
— Yan
—
J————
| ' 250
The Art of Logicke,
CE I—_
[ Peeſtiom] A quettion(then) is
abwayes diſp cd 1n 2 Syliogilme. By
| queſtion 15 mcant,a doubrfullaxiome:
to as, the office of a Syllogiſme is to
determine a doubttull ſentence, Ari-
fotle doch afford vs theſame precept:
for ( according to him ) every propoſs-
bs. the tas. t
hut thaſe onely, that may br donbied of.
Fop./ib. x. capi11, yea he accounts
them wed that take that for « pronc-
ple, that no men grants, or put that for
4 qneeſicon that all men grants:ſeing this
& withowt doubt, andthat is confeſſed
by mone. Top. bib, 1.cap. 10.
& pur; buc both of thear meanc one
. | hung, namely, ordered, framed,or fit-
ted
Argument | By argument 18 meane
(hae) achird argument: by-1e wee
vnderſtang; char, the ofticeota-$yllo-
fine 15, co prouc onething by ano-
r: and ſo much-we hane from: 4-
ERGY edhnecd
A -
th
ne rwmcunen
roſtorle. X $yllogs/me prowerone thing, |
of another, by 4 madien. Poſt, 9. 2. |
Cap. 4. There can be ws Sytlogy/me to |
tiow aug ly not to be called into queſtion:
[ Diſpoſed] Ariſtotle ſayth, placed |
ln fl
es. mn
* 2
<0
4.
+ :
4+— 2
The Art of Logicke.
prome one roing of another, ynleſſe ſome
medium be brought, which u referred
by a certame attribution ro both ex-
rreames. Prior; ib, 1. cap. 23. From
whence 1t followes, that, in every
Syllogitme chere are three cermes,
and no more. It there be any other
part belides theſethree, it 15 called a
proſyllogilme, Ariſtotle rcacheth rhe
ſameching. Ir «& manfeff(in his tudge-
ment ) that, every Syilogi/me is made
by three termaes, and no more : if there
be ore third er guments then onegthere
are more Syllogiſmes then one. Prior.
hib. 1. cap. 5. Polt.lhib.1, cap. 19.
[ Antecedent ] This ſignifies the two |
firſt propoſitions in a Syllogiſme, |
from whence the third 5 conduded: |
ſoſayrh Ariſtotle allo ; Ir is plame that |
a Syllogiſme conſiſts of two propoſitions,
and not of muore : for, the three termes
doe make thoſe two propoſitions. Prior.
hib.1. cap. 25- BETTS
| Thefirſt, is called thepropolinion,
becauſe, itconrainesa; leaſt the predi- |
care, or Conſequent part of the que-
ſtion, The ſecond, 1s called the al-
_——
ee,
251
|
mn —
ſump-
=.
The Art of Logicke. |
)
|
' | required more to inferre the Concluſion,
ſumption z becau(c, it is taken out of
the According to Ariſtotle, the |
firſt, hath the name of Maier, becauſe,
it contames the predicate pert of the
queſtion: the ſecond,the title of Minor,
becanſe, the ſubief} part of the queſtion
6 diſpoſedia it, Prior, (ib, 1, cap. 14-
They vary in words, but not mm the
thing. Onely Raumas ſpcakes of all
Syllogiſmes in generall, as wellcom-
pound, as ſimple. Ariſtotle of ſimple
onely, but we ſhall rcſolue this diffi-
cultic, when we.come to compound
Syllogiſmes.
[ Granted ] The inferring of the
concluſion followeth the granting of
the antecedent, and Ariſtotle meaneth
theſame, when he ſayth in his defi-
nition : A different thing doth follow
jrom thoſe that are put, By par he can
meane no other but grexted.
[ Neceſſarily concluded | Ariſtotle
fayth,doth neceſſarily follow from thews
that are pur (tatis) there i nothing
then th: termes themſclues that are
diſpoſed. Prior. lib, 1.Cap. Is |
Now!
———_—
th
OA
.
———_.
| The Art of Logicke, 253
| Now the definition is vnfolded,
wee will entcr vpon the particular
chings contained ynder it. b:}
EESTteoLT oT'e:Tere]
> > ——_——_—_ —
CULT XLLVEIET
«
Of a ſimple Syilogi/me.
Simple,
A Syllogiſme, 6 Rammus,
Componud,
Simple, where the conſequent part of
the queſt1on, is placedin the prope- |
fition ; the antecedent m the af- |
ſanption.
Husa Syllogiſme isdivided, and | * |
the firſt kindethercof 15 defined.
Ariſtotle doth divide a Syllogiſme
into Oftenſine, and Hypetheticall; and
theretorc heagreeswith Ramus who-
ly. Prioy, ib, 1. cap. 23. I doe not
finde, that hedefines a (imple or 0-
ſtenſwe Syllogiſme in any one ſer
tence: yet, this definition 1s wholy =
cn
GE EEE
254
EEG
The Art of Logicke,
| makes each propoſition : and thele |
ken out of him, as we ſhall ſce when
we vntold che parts of it.
[ Simple ] This word is giuen toa
Syllogulme, after the ſame lort, thatir
was given to an axiome, even be-
cauſe, thethird argument is diſpoſed
with che queſtion without comuntti-
on, or compoſition,
[Conſequent part,ehc.) Theſe words |
ſhew whercina Syllogiſme (imple,
med. It is /zeyple,becauſc one terme of |
the queſtion, and the third argument |
two Icions infeare a third,
ker pogo axiome alſo, The |
predicate part of the queſtion, muſt
be framed with the thud argument,
in the propoſition : and the ſubic&t |
part with the third argument in the |
allumprion ; not ſo much becauſe, |
men haue ſayd ſo: but becauſe nature |
will haue itſo:this example will ſhew |
it. One ſayth, Socrates i werewoms: |
another doubts of ir:f I would prouc |
it to be true, achird argument mult
be brought, that ſhall rye che predi-
and how the ſame ought to be tra- |.
* # 2
s. « ® -
4 _ ”—
< W
.
| I
; "2 © i” REN _ - ————
»
-
FIT
The Art of 'Logicke.
— — ————
cate and ſubje&t of that propoliton |
rogether, Now then, for chat end [
bring the cerme ſuf/5ce. If this rerme
be diſpoſed in a Syllogiſme, ic muſt
| be framcd ater this ſort z He that &
| inſt, t vertnons : but Socrates is 4 uſt. |
| Therefare be 6s vertnows. 1ay nature |
' appoints this frame ; becaule, luſtice |
1s aſpcciall vere, therefore where
Tuſtice is, vere needs mult be.
| Theretore Ariſtotle was a true fol-
| lower of nawre, when he ——
co diſpoſe argumnents on this manner,
| Preor. 4b, 1. Cap. 4+ To conclude,
from hence it 15 manufeſt, tha, the |
Concluſion inferred, þy every cue
ſimple SyHogilme, muſt be gathered.
out of thepropoliticn, and atſumpri- |
on after chis manner, viz. The ance-
cedent, or ſubic part of theconclu- |
(ion, out of the atli:mption; and the
. conſequent, or predicate part, out of
the propolition;and where this 1snot ,
found, the Syllogiſme is falſe, and
| concludes nothing.
| As wefoundinalimpleaxiome,(o
' ſhall we finde in a (ur pleSyllogiſme3 |
| athrma-
Sn He OE Þ
as 7 Os ae OT
T#/ -
—— _—
OO”
On” 5". 04 - Rl
+ =. =
_ —_—— .
* , "
_ wr ne A RIB. ao rg . ts... i _
y -
2 =. Se RE ao xx -
_—_— Oz
-
_
A —— - — {{ ————
256
__
| —— — ———
The Art of Logicke. |
-
Ramus.
Jo
|
affirmation, and negation ; generalr
tie, and {pecialitie,
A ſfirmatme, when ail the parts are
aff matine. Negatine,when euher part
| of the Artecedert, and the ( oncluſron
, AYeNepallne.
| Generall,when the propoſuton, and aſ-
' [wmiption are generall.Speciall, when
etther of thems 25 ſpeciall, Proper,
| mwhenbath areproper,
| Every Syllogiſme ( ſaych Ariſtotle)
| 15 either aſſirmarine, or negate, vn
| ver/all, or m part, Vrior. lab. T.Cap. 23+
Umverſ/all is that which conſiſteth of
all univerſall termes z particular confi-
feeth of termes,as well particular as uni
verſall. Wherefore, if the Concluſion be
vniver/all, the termes muſt be yniver-
ſall. But the termes may be unver{all,
and yet the conclu/ron not yniverſall.
of the propo':tions muſt be like the con-
In every Syllogi/me, euther both or one | ©
cluſion. Afffirmatine,or negatine,neceſ- |
fary,or ( ontingent. And thns alwayes |
the termes ina $ 1Ulogs/me muſs be af-
fetled: othermi/c ut ts not ſimply a true
one, Prior, lib. 1. cap. 2.4.
From
4
The Art of. Lopecke.
un.
- = -
From hence Ariforle inferrech fur-
ther ( in che place laſt alledged) rhat,
In every Syllogi/me there ouſt be one
terms unSvuer/all, and one affirmative :
becauſe, without 4 vnruerſall it 11 wot 4
Syilogs/me, or beings not tothe tha
Fo ind or begs Ne ef Thanfs
he. We nay ts the like of thar Syllos!
giſme, that confiſtsot all negarmes, \
It may ſecme by this, that Ariftosle
doth not acknowledge ary Syllo-\
giſme thar conliſterh of proper pro-
polinons, Andindecd, it is doubrfull
what has mdgement is mche marrer ,
yerzin all lkc1hood;hedoth acknow-)
I-dgechem noleffe-:chen Rem, as
ſhall appeare when I come vnto the
particular kind-s 5 where this' whole
precepc will be made more Certainc,
and clege to our vnderftanding,
CHA?
Wy
259* |
{
ve EL EDS oo ”- , ih $64.47 aw o pry
i : PR
—_—.
p W =
+. 4
,
% c-
NF
SS 33;
. - -
'#:
F
_————_—_
258. © The dr1 of Logiche. |
I,
bag
Cu ae XLIX..
© Of Ariſtotles three ſigwres,
Riftotle delivers the forme. of
) Syllogiſmcs; Proor, 4b. 1
5 OS cp.12 andinide on
into three Hgures,or allignesthe ma-
wget chemchree manner of wayes,
In the firſt place hetpeaks
of them fo vnuverſally, that he com-
prehends falſe or ynprofinable Syllo-
gilmes, as well as crue: but in the lae-
ter, he ſpeakes of true Syllogiſmes
preciſcly, on this nianner.
IL. If the leſt extreanus be of
. the middle ternne, and the meddle
terme of the firſt extreames or the
laſt extreeme be denjed of the nid-
dle terme, and the middle termec af-
firmed of the firſt extreame ; then it
& the ſſl figure.
2. /f the wedalte termee be both affir-
med, and denyed of both the ex-
freames: then it is che ſecond figure. |
34f
i Lunt af. PIG
i The Art of Logiche..
«oe Se 7 1
3+ "3. if the laſt evecroeme be « ”
denyed of the ettldie terme ave th
faff exrreanse br affirmed of the
figure.
. And after his manner, the enidette
terme onyhe to be &/pofedt ni eaod
3 a3 wen 20h ny yo
Every oniverſullofiowariucquioſſins
_— by the firft figzre and
bat efter one manner of way. -
"How nefatine wnlecr/al qatjiion 11
[ proned, both by the faſt, and ſecond þ
| pure : by obe firſt one way, 'by the [e«
cond t wo wayers.
Every perticalar affirmarne queſtion
is proned, by the firſt,and third figures :
—_— ffs rr mma
"a
dps pricaiary
Pope ove wif" ty che fees
| wayer in che jacoua, an thrie Wayer in
the third, Prevv 46b.'x 'oap. 16.
Thus farre Ariſtotle doth giue vs
| | ralesfor the frammg of a Syllogiſitc,
and the manner. of concluding» all
weddle 12ra0+7 thaw, 37 10bb Herd ;
|| I VOM kind |
—_—
—_— In — a _ CMS
CET
s
The Art t of Legicke, | l
f T,
:
AA
|; MARES: yt
kindof queſtions by them. I eſteemed
it the bcit way to ſet downe all, his'
precepts cogaher z becaule they are |
the ealier.to be remembred, Wh
next place, I will ſer downe what R«- |
ms hath delivered, . and compare |
themcogether, that we'may the der- |
ter ſec their agreemens,. and theteby |
we ſhall the bctrer vnderſtand, then |
by cicher ofthem apart, £8
$74 | A
| Of Rams contratt Syllogiſme.
ax; doth diſpoſe his precepts,
for the franung of Syllogilmes,
in a differenc maner from Ariſtotle
I willzeport them as. I fipde them in
him, and nf { ov wa hag to him,
A fineple ky Jllogiſme bath the puts
contratled,: or p_
A
| © - The 4rt of Logiche,”
- argument, brought 4s an exarple,
is ſo applied to the particular que-
ſtion,that it 15 the anteced:nt in both
parts : and the aſſmnyption affirmed,
[+ |
{ --''This forme of Syllogiſme is 4ri-
| ftotles third figure, reported in the
| Chapter going before ; andcontaines
| nothing more then we finde'in him,
| onely chey differ m the name.
[ Contratt] This word giues the
namevnto this forme. In common
ther: or drawn 3nto a narrow roome:
the rca'on of the name ariſeth from
ſhort, & bricfe diſpolingof rhe third
| argument with the quettzon, in this
figure, Wherein it diff-rs from the
rett: and it muſt bee fo contract, be-
cauſe wee findeit ſoin the common
| wſe of menjandnototherwiſevntol-.
| JEds 7.5 4, 0
| Argument brought evc.]By theſe
words, and the reſt which follow,the
different kind of this forme is ſet out
A conralt S logiſme, i when the)
ipeech ir (ignifiesa thing cruſhe coge-| _
the nature of the thing ynamely,the|
S 3 by
DD —
%
— — Q_—_ 4 TT T7.
The art of Logicke. 4
| for an-eyawple, or an inſtance
by toure. properties, whereof thus is
the fixlh, namely, that the third argu-
ment, ( ox muddle terme which is v-
ſed to prouegthar the latter part of the
quettion rightly wyned vnto, or ſe-
| |
uercd from the tormer part) is put
g
rung the erwwg wherein the queition
concluded 1s true ; a3wee ſhall ſec 2+
non in the Syllogz{meuelte,
In chu all che Legich chooles doc
apree, Fylt they call this forme an
Expoſitory Syllog:ſme oncly, becauſe
thethurd argument 18 asir were an EX»
won, or commentary to vntold |
ruth of the queſtion concluded :
orclſc,becauſc the axgumentdoth ex-
polc the. indeterminate ſubic-part
of the queſtion, vncoone certaine,,
and (ingular thing : as wee ſhall fee
when wee come to gine inſtance of
this precept. Secondly, The Auchors
of beſt credit doe expreſly teach the
ſame thing with Remw, Awexpoſite-
ry Syllogy/me ( ſayth eAbiaco 1 [ent.q.
Sebi. Z.) then good, when the mid-
dle term inuporteth one thing, and ns
- | ores |
_ — — Om 4
*
OY
\oi The Art of Logicke.
263
wore. {fit comprebend snti
things, tt 6s bt, pris Ae
riftotle, this forme concludes particu-
lar queſtions onely, as hach beene
ſhewed, cep.q9.therefore in his iugg-
men che thixd argument muſt bee
pur for an example, for ſuch queſti-
ons cannot be proved by any ocher,
[ Particular queſiiine} This is the
ſccond propertie of OO
ſtionsare concluded here, but parti-
cular : and {o fayth Arifforlke m the
rm going before, and hceadds,
wy 25" are concluded three wayes
by ic, It therefore any queſtion that
i5 generall, or z be concluded
mw ehus figure, then the opegpmne is
falſe, and prowes
[ Antecedent mn both parts] This i 1s
s forme, the
re cr propertic of
hag che firft place,or |
PEAS bathin the in,
Alumprion. Arefterle had the
#e;yintheir coMmmenaary vpon Ard
Jos TIA A
—_ 54
—
$5,
_© #
The art of Logicke.
| for ancexawple, or an inſtance
Hopon Sylleg:ſme oncly, becauſe |
, or commentary to vntold |
by toure properties, whereof this is
he firlh, namely, that the third argu-
ment, ( ox middle terme which is v-
ſed to prouegthat the latter part of the
quettzon isrightly wyncd vnto, or ſe- "|
uered from the tormer part) is "ho
ning the etxwvg wherein the bra. 4
en) ; Wee Rr ſec 2-
non inthe Syllogi{met(elte, |
Inch all che Legick Fchooles doe
agree, Fult they call this forme” an
churd argument 18 a$ir were an Ex»
ruth of the concluded :
orclſe,becauſcthe doth ex-
2776 gra rn indeterminate ſubic- pare
, Vito one certaine,,|
Jo fiogular Treas ;25 wee ſhall fee
when wee come to gue inſtance of
this precept. Secondly, The Authors
of belt credic doe expreſly teach the
ſame thing with Remas, Aw 9-
ry Syllogy/me ( ſayth eAliaco 1 ſert.q.
gebit, £. ) & then when the wad-
hyndan lin. Dua
Ts,
j—_
th.
The Art of Logicke.
the
Mt... th. -
—
3
—_
—T
things, it is naught. According to Ae
riftotle, this forme concludes particu-
lar queſtions onely, as hach beene
ſhewed, cep,q9.therefore in his mgg- |
men the thixd ment muſt bee
put for an example, for ſuch queſts
ons cannot be proved by-any ocher,
[ Particelar queſtiie} T his is the
ſccond propertic of thsform,no que-
ſtionsare conduded here, bur parti-
cular : and fayth Arifforle m the
chapter going before, and heeadds,
that, my areconcluded three wayes
15 - nap img ww dude
wrhus fagure, then the yllogilme 1s
falſe, and proves nockung, ->
[ Antecedent ons
the chird propertic
cer: The waddle toreve (lay the Feſw-
foals : Progr, fab. 1 649.6. Jusſabuefted
#e;jinthar commentary vpon Ars
s} Thisis|
$5»
|
6. 2
54 fs
bi
* Ts. md
—_ ——
; i .
The Art of Logicke.
——
to bath pores of wel extreme 5 the
thad þ
iſ: 4þ fired] This is the
laſt rc. rr 6gure. Aryfotle
requiresrhe ſame $00; namely,
chacgrhe firſt-exeamb be affirmed of
che middle: eerie; therefore the af.
rion z5altirmed? tor (according
jo hum} thic Grit exupame is alwaycs
diſpoſe inthe atſu:nprion : and the
Tejuites mn che place latt alledged doe
exprally ceach.char,jri che third figure |
che Atenormult alwaycs be affirma- |
tes? ons Dobiiigtt 2”
We haucanmitance of thi nhgur
in hs bref Dcomrk,”
ilge,.'' «5 11,4 5
Sewe confidtwie- is vertne: 4s £0M-
Ha \ +4 Ya
= 37 LY
concluded.; Some confidence,' &c.
This Tay is particular ; becaule, ver-
cue 1Sattnbuted to \eonfidence,bue'i in
ſome part, not coall kinde of conti-
dence vmycrlally, ' The third argu-
=
-Herea we < finde: a particular queſtion |
**
"
mene is a (ingular ching, vis. Con-
|
—_—
ſtancy,!
.
—_ —_—
EI "I
*F +
"
y 0.2
_ \
| CY
-+2fthis figure may be negariue, and
| determinate ſubie& part of the que-.
——
. The Art of 'Logicke.
- 265
fancy, and thisrs pur 28'an example,
orlingular inſtancezreducing the in-
{tion 'ynto one determinate thing:
and thereby exponnding, or vntol-
ding that which was darke, by chat
which 1s cleere, and expoſing vncer-|
tainne to" a certaintie. This forme 1s |
contratted, becauſe it. containes no
more exprelly but che queſtion, and
the third argument: The attirmatwe
atſumption, and concluſion are both
| wanting: if they be ſupplyed it will
ſtand mchis forme, 42
Conftancy is a wertwe.
| Conflaniy is « Confillence. ' |
Therefore ſome Confidence 1s 4 wer-
ine, :
By Arifotles rule the propoſition
Rem agrees with him when hee
debarresthe atſumption onely from |
negation. In a Contraft forme wee |
hauc this figure,inthis example,"
nt 7] | Some
CC ——_—_—
|
-
x
_ 4
—
—
- The Art of Logteke, ©
Io,
Some confidence ts net @ verine : "R
atdaciouſueſſe.
If wedoe cexplicute this contraſted
forme, we ſhall haucit ſtand thus,
No audaciouſneſſe © a yertwe,
eAll andaciou/neſſe is confudence.
Therefore ſore confidence ts not t
Veritas. / ,
| Weleame from 4riſtaile, cape 48.
chat, che propolicon and allumption
may be vniverlall, ye the conclulion
not vmverſall:; here we ſee it avowd,
More cxamples are requilite coallu-
ftraie chis precept, wheydfore I will
adde ome others. .
Some wan i prodent : as Socrates
Sowe mas is xt fortunaro: as Her- |
tr,
Both theſe examples may bc thus |
vntolded.
Secrates us predent,
Socrates i. 4 MAN. -
Therefore ſome $041 14 prudent
.
\
4 b
Hello
_-—— 2
—
2»
5
|
|
.
——_
—— —
| in theſe ewo laſt arguments are vni- |
| 4-14 The Art of Logicke. 267 |
— —_—
Helo is not fortunate.
Hettor us 4 moan. |
T berefore ſome wan is not fortunate.
Ariſtetle requires ( as we haue ſer
downe cap. 48. ) that every Syllogi/me
muſt hens one prop»ſition yntver/all.
It lteemes, cither that rule holds nor
always, orelſe fe doch not acknow-
ledge that ſuch Syllogiſines as theſe
be, to be true: but (if 1 may ſay what
[ chinke) I belecue neither of them
tor,the nature of thethingsthemſclues
will avow this kinde of difpunng.
No conclufjon- can be inferred, vn-
lefſe there be one propoſition vni-
verſall: for nothing can be deduced
out of meere (ingulars,
If any demand which propoſition
verſall?
Janſwer, the alfumption of them
both be vniverfall ; for char is @ 011 |
ver/all, where the predicate i attribs- |
| ted 21nt0 ad, or the whole ſwbict 1 (0 as, |
| #0 attribute onto all and unto the whole |
| [ubielt ge one endhe ſame thing(inthe
wage”
IT,
I2,
©...
- — -
*» -
” -” .
"268
The Art of Lovicke, 4
|
indgenent of eAriſtotle ) Priop. fib. 1,
cap. 1, Now, the terme wen, 15 atrri- |
butedto Sorrater,ang Hefler wholy : |
ſo as, there is no part of Socyarer, vio
which that terme doth na; belong. |
If any obicR, that Socrates 18 an 1nd1-
viduall, and therefore that terme cans |
not be ſubiced in 2 vnverſall pro-
poſition, I anſwer, It tharcerme did
1mport no more butan jndividuall,
then I grantche argumentto be good,
but in this place ic doth notimport a
mecre individuall : for then we muſt
fay: This Socrates, e&c,which we may |
not, ycaalchough we might ſay ſo,
yer that terme 1umports more then an |
individuall ; for he is ſpoken of as a *
man,and therefore as aipecies,not as
this, or that individuall body, or nu-
mericall ſubſiſtency. It chis be erue,
then Arteries rule is vniverſall ; cls:
it comes too ſhorty and he hath omit--
ted one kinde of Syllogilme out of!
his Legicke, which 1 dare.noc gran. . /
I ſuppoſe, that,this precept 15made
deere enough, therefore I palle. to |
the nexe, - Ah
1
CHAP.|
—_—
..
PTY ABR oor en Yn a Ci, X54
|
S
The Art of Logicke.
269
Cu R LIL
. Of an explicate Syllogiſme R
i genera.
p
tbe propoſutton, aſſumption, and con-
clnſion, are orderly framed wogether,
[s this kinde the propoſition u alwajes
generall, or proper, and the concluſi-
ou hike the propojition.and aſſumpti-
9n, or the weaker of them.
differcnce of explicate and con-
traced Syllogilmes expreſly z and in
the ching : bur ( according to hun ) |
we muſt tollow nacure in every pre-
| ceptof Logicke,and chat is as as
if he had ſayd fo : for nature com-
mands, that,fome Syllogilmes be ex-
Plicate, and not coniraRt ; becauſe no
third argument, that ſerucs to prouc
a queſtion chat is vniverſall or pro-
per,can be put as an example of et-
ther
| | -1 Syllogiſme is then explicare, ll
Riſftotle hath not ſhewed vs the |
|
Rams.
.
—_— _—_
— — — —_
\ —— _= * — _- - _ -
., . . *
. . 1 ,
. .
”.
-
—
—_ —
td + nad
he. _—
270
————_
. The Art of Logitke,
affirmative, oy proper
ther of them ;thcrefore there muſt be
ſome $ yllogiſmes explicate, chat can-
not becontraRed: and there may be
fame contracted, thar need not be ex-
plicated z and conſequently ( accor-
ding to nature ) ſome Syilogiſmes
may be c ce,and ſome conrraf.
T he preſence of the two propoliti-
ons, vc 19995 wi ia laſifciens rea-
ſon why we hould call a Syllogi\me
explicare:for chereby ics vntoldedto
the full, The firſt thac be-
longs vnto the Syllogiſmes of thus |
kinde, is this, viz. The propeſitien ts 4l- |
wayes general, if the concluſion be vnt-
ver/all, or pariicules, if the concluſion
be then the «4
fo. Now, this awfollowes dee
poling of che third argument,
= th not the will _—
ju unrss we thall ſee by the parti- |
5; ) The ronrlufion maſ
prom like the propeſitron: and af/ --r owe} |
wpniver/all, and |
|
when both of them are
and affirmative,
then the encore ores when
|
the a nmption 3s particnlar, and neg a-
tine,
\
The Art of Logicke.
xe, or proper and negatives or the pro- |
poſitron negarine, then the concinſiow
be accor dirgly z ehexctore, when-
ſocver an explicare Syllogiſme varices |
' fromany ot cheſe rules, « 13falfe, and
- concludes 1tothing : nature ſayes it
muſt be thus, therefore when it 1s 0-
| therwiſe, nature is perverred,and we
| erre from auth, Theſe rules, 'and no
| more bur thefe, belong toancxplicxe
Syllogiſme m common.
|
GCuar- LI;
0 the firſt kind of an explicate
Sy!ligrſme,
There are two lindes of an explicate |
Syllogi/mee The firſt is where the ar-
gument alwayes follow es, and one part
us
fd Khomiig rote pe mee Hr
| one;that the third
Homes 6; hmmm rome 4
od A
— wa ——_ w—
— 00 AM. 4 at. 44 46
Pd
> — —— ——
CCC
The Art of Logicke.
|
[
[
| 1, Every wiſe man doth v/e his rea-
ir the predicate, or conſequent part,
the propoſition, and aſſumption. The ſe- |
cond propertie is, that euther the propo-
ſition, or aſſump1on, is alwayes denyed.
I lay, extber 4 becauſe ſometime the
propolition sdeny<d,and ſometimes
the athumpuon inditferendly y as the
queſtion and churd argument require. |
If one be negarine, i is enough,
Therefore; in this
queſtions ( onely ) are concluded, I
lay negatiue,either yniverſall, particu- |
Jar, or proper.. | |
We hauecchys whole precept contai-
ned in Aritetles ſecond figure: asthe
Reader may ſee, reported cap. 49+
therefore I need nor repeat it here.
I will alledge ſome inſtances toſhew
the praRiceof this rule,
ſon well.
He that is overcome with paſſion, |
doth not wſe his reaſon well.
Therefore he that # overcome with
. paſſion, is not a wiſe man.
Inthis argumenc the propolinion 15
an vniverſall affrmatiue,the atſump-
e Negatiue |
tion,
—
&
42 * ——— So—_ —— —_—
0
”—
|
|
|
FA
a” 2
” ”
H—
The Art of Logicke,
EE
273
_—_—
tion, and concluſion is vniverſall ne-
gatiuc,
2, They that knew the wiſcdeme of,
God, did not crucifie Chrift,
The princes of the world ceucified| *
Chreft. |
Therefore the princes of the world
knew not the wiſedome of God.
This frame containes a propoſiuon
negaciue vnivcriall,an allumpcion at-
firmarie ſpeciall, and a concluſion
negatiue ſpeciall,
3. Indus that writ the Epiſtlezwas the |
brother of lames. ' |
Indus Iſcariot, was not the bre-
they of lames.
Therefore In4a: Iſcariot, writ not |
the Epiſtle. s
In this example, the propalition is
affirmanue proper z che atſumpcion
and conclulion 1s negatiue =_
Thele three are ſufhcient to ſhew vs
the vieot this rule z therefore I will
content my ſelte win chem, and palle-
to thenexe,
T CHAP.
——_—_——
The Art of Logicke,
Ca 47” LH.
of the ſecond kind of au Ex-+
| plicate Syllogifme,
The ſecond kinde is, when the argu-
Rams. went goeth beforegin the propeſition:
| and followeth affirmed, w the a(-
ſumption.
yu figure hath alſo two propet-
cies, The firſt: the aygwmtient go-
eth before in the propoſition ( that 18 )
its ſwbſefted and thereby it bath the
firſt place, In the ſecond propertie,
the ar followeth inthe aſſwmpti-
on, (that 1s) «t & predicated mn the aſ-
| ſumption ; and the «[[wmoption is affir-
med, or 4 ine ; as 1f 1t were layd,
the argnment i predicated affirmatine-
ty m the aſſumption.”
Ariſtotle made this law, and cals
| ic his firſt figure: as his owne words
| doe ſhew, rclated Cap. 49.
It may be doubred, whether 4+
ſtotle or Ramus hath kept belt order
in placing che figures of a SyHo- |
| pilme, |
|
— —
en.
7 wah
" 4
y ff F
. . , 4
*
_ F
-
is. _ OOTY ah n ak the Ss —_—
The Art of Logiche.
—_
_—
_— —_
no one of them doth giue light
knowledgeto the other: ne1ther doch
it further our vie of them, when this
15 ſc before that, or that before this:
Aviftotle ed the one, becauſe
all queſtions nught be concluded in
it: Remw preferd another, becatile
the argument is diſpoſed wih che
queſtion after amore ſingle, or tium-
ple maner: therore both did well
ſo farre as they had reaſon, neither of
them did berrer, beeaule ( 25 I fayd )
cheir order doch nearher profic, nor
hinder their vie, therefore I hauc faid
cnough to ſarisfiethe doubt, and will
goc on toſhew how chis rale may be
vied, | |
Whoſoover i boyne of God, overcoms-
meth the World,
| Hethat beleewes on Chriſt, « borue
| of God.
| Therefore he that beleenes on (hrift
' bathoymoomethe World.
| In this cxample, all che parrs. are
, vniverlally affirmariue, wheretore I
-
wall ;
giſme. I anſwere it isnot maceriall,
whether ofthem be firſt, or laſt: for,
3 OT
|
Wo
.
-
.
The Art of Ligicke.
|
| be proved by this, and CEN coker
may be referred wnto this, therefore | -
will ſhew another,
He that i a mwrtherer, bath not cter-'
wall life abidmg m hims,
He that batetb bis brother, is a mar- |
therer.
Therefore he that hateth bis hn.
bath not cternall life abiding m buys. |
Here we haue the propolition,and |
concluſion vniverſally negate and
che atſumption vniverſally afirma- |
tive, In the hike ſort, this =; is vie- |
full, in all other queſtions that are |
concluded.
Ariſtotle, 15 of opinion, that ths
onely 15 the forme or figare of 4 He
Sylogs/me : becanſegevery que
they aye made perfit by it. Prior. 16.1,
(ap. 4- Thus much muſt be granted,
and ſo farre itis perfic 3 yea and the'
onely perfeA figure, The ſecond,
and third figures, arc no lefle agree-!
able to Ariſotles definition of a Syl-
logiſme, then the fiſt ; as he ſhall ſce|
that will examine them thereby :
therefore they want nothing of rhat
effentiall
The Art of Logtcke,
elſentiall perfe&tion, that is inthe firſt,
what can haye greater perfe&ion
ch:n chat, whichevery way agrees to
the definition thereof z and conſe-
quently, chey 1nferre their concluſi-
ons asnecellanly as che farſt, The firſt
figure onely hath perfection, elTenci- |
all, and ac-idemall, The ſecond, and
third haue perfe&ion ci[cnriall, bur
' not accidenrall, and this 1s the diffe-
rence betweene chem. By chele things
; that are paſt, wee haue finiſhed all
choſ: precepts, whuch teach vs, how
co frame arguments together in a lim
ple Syllogilme, Inche nex: place, we
muſt cometo acompound Syllogil-
me, if we looke noturther then Ra-
mus, but we muſtlooke further ; elſe
welhall make our art detetiue ; for
Logicke doth teach vs to mdge,as well
as co diſpoſe, If we muſt wdge, rhen
we mult looke for truch,or falſhood,
and conſequently for precepts that
ſhall ceach vs how to finde out truth,
and the ſcverall kindes of it: For this,
wee muſt | conſult with e,Lrifotle, |.
therefore in the next Chaprer, I will
&- 4 report
|
277 |
|
The Art of Logicke,
—_—
I—_
| Indemonſtrable Science, in the mac-
| tothe definition thereof,
report his Precepts,With as much bre-
viticas I can,
RED
Cnaye. LIIII,
Of a Demonſtratine Syllogiſme.
= firſt place, we muſt ſetdowne
e precepts which concerne necel- |
fary wuth ; winch viually is called
Science © for, that is firft in nacnre,
time, excdllency, and our apprehen-
fjon, of that e Friſtorle fayth thus,
Science 15< Demonſtiratiue. Poſt.
hb. T, "tt 4p. 3o |
We haue delivery the precepts of
ter of a definition, and diftribution,
wee muſt now cometo the precepts
of Dceimonſtratiue ſtience; and firſt
But foraſmuch as, —_—
ok - ble
—_—
a6 if Qin
——
is; The Art of Logicke.
blevizTo vndcritand what, or wher-
fore, a thing 5, and ſecondly, That s
| hang , Poſter. lib. 1. Cap. 13. there-
one ſentence.
Demenſtratine ſcience, is that, which
" bane by a demonſtration, Poſter.
lab.1.( ap 4.446.2.cap.3. Hui &c,
- This ſentence is obſcure in ic ſelfe,
therefore hee doch vnfold ic in theſe
words, |
A demonſirationgss aSyllogiſmegthat
conſiſtetb of things neceſſary: that is
t0 ſay, of propefitions, and concluſion,
that are neceſſary; and this is proper
10 4 demwnſtration, / ſay both, be-
Cauſe the concluſion may be neceſſavy,
when the medi is not neceſſary;
but when the medium 14 neceſſary,
fore,both of chem aredefined by this
the conclufon cannot be but nece([a-
Winn 44 t18(hb is atwayes collevied.
from. ruth.
Wherefore.mnatfoever a man knowes
by Demorſiration, beth, it mwſ} be
—_— the medings alſo of the
As
— ._—_
T4 Dowon-
] 280
The Art of Logicke.
Demonſtration muſt be neceſſary , O-
ther wiſe we nelther know what «thing
15,nor that a thing ts neceſſarily : but ex-
ther we thinke we know, and doe not, or
thinke we know not at all. Poſter. lib, 1.
cap. 6. V uoniam iprtny Ofc.
Ee the pon of demon-
ſtratiue ſc1ence, isſet outin common,
The proper nature of that ſcience
whereby wee vnderſtand what or
wherefore a thing 15,15{et out in theſe
words,
The medium « then neceſſary, when
it confeſteth of things true, firſt, 1m-
medzate, berter knowne, preceding,
and cauſe of the concluſton.
Thoſe are firſt, and true, which hae |
force to argue, not from others, but
of them/elues.
They ought to be tree, becanſe that
which «s not, cannot be knowne: they
muſt be firſt, becauſe they ought to
be indemonſtr able,and conſiſt of thew
owne proper principles, we nwaſt not
1mquire of the prencoples of Scvence,
i: 08614 they are ſo; but every one
of thems, even by u ſelfe, onght to be
worthy of Id edit. The
— ew —
———— i. 4. A
þ
|
|
The Art of Logicke,
The medtvm nent containe the canſe!
of the concluſion, ſeeing we know n0-.
4g vnlt ſe Wee wnderſt and rve
Canjes, The medium ht to confiſt |
of things preceding rbe concluſion z |
both in nature, and (ur knowtedge : |
therefore the princ:pynms of a d. moore |
ftration ts an 1memu-d14;e propo':nion,
VIZ, that hatk none before it, Fofter.
hb. 1, cap. 4. & 6.T op. (46.1.Cap.1-
Wheru po, demonſtrations are made
by definitions. Voſter. lib, 1, cap. 3 3+
4rd. they arethe principles thereof.
Poſter. lib... tap. 3. for a definition
Can no wajes be proved Poſter lib.z.
Cap 4.5 6. 7oltb.1.Cap 9.
By this whole diſcourſe we haue
rules to know, what Syllogiſine con.
caines a truth (1mply nece!lary, and
we arc ſent ynto them onely, whoſe
third argument comprehends the |
cauſcs of the concluſion, and ſuch |
cauſes alſo, as are better knowne vnro
vsthenthe conclulionitſelte. Where-
fore, for further cxplication hereok, |
Ariftotle doth ſhew vs what cauſes |
theſe be, and how they concurre,
In
_—_
.
ad... Alt. Hit... Mme dl Cone Md
The Art of Logicke,
In theſe words: kj
For 4: much as, we doe thin know,
when we vnderſtand the can/er, and
theſe be feure. 1. the forme. 2.the
matter. 3, the efficient ; and 4. the
end.
T ben the concluſion bath a neceſſary
eruth, when one of theſe Cauſes #5 tar
ken, and Placed as a mradtums in two
Propoſitions wuh that Concluſoon.
And by ( avſes is meatt, not onely
the cauſes of thoſe things that are,
but alſo of thoſe things that have
2.Cap. IT, & 12:
Now wee doe fully vnderſtand,
whereto finde neccllary truth in a
Syllogilme,Our ncxclabour muſt be,
to fet our theſe (cientificall Syllo- |
giimes by other properties z that we '
may know them the more calily,and
certainely ; for that cauſe, Ariftotle
doth Giiripes a demonſtration aker
brow or ſhall be Fn. Poſs lib.
Ti be Art of Logicke,
eps"
Particular,
A demonſtration, 6)
C Affirmative.
T Negative, Po--
ſter /ib.l.cap 24.
A demonſtration univer/all, excells a
particular:and an affirmatine ss bet-
ter then a negatine. cap. 24 2 5.
This diſtribution followes the na-
ture of a Syllogilme, tor every demon-
ftration 4s ſyllegiſme, though every
ſyllogi/me be not a demonſtration. Poſter.
lib,1.cap.2. andis very victullto giue
vsknowledge where to finde chisne-
cetlary truch, and the degrees of it.
To conchide, this matter of demon-
ſtratiue ſcience, he ſayth :
The firſt fogure # fitteſt for a demon-
ftration, yea, chiefly proper vnto this |
ſcience,and it 14 to be ſeught out,one-
ly by that. Poſter. bib, 1. cap. 14.
Some 'perhaps will looke, that T
d A " ſhould|
283 .|
—> ———— — _— ———
on. £m Se Rat He ON BAN Mien TY * YR 9s i Py. aw OB, Y; wy ns
The Art of Logicke,
. | chem together, ſerue to proue a ſen-
| cluſion anſyerable to this rule, then
es - a
| fhould giue inſtances,to open the vſe
the more needfull, becauſe fome' are |
of op1mon, that, no example can be
given anlwcrable ro thus rule.
I anſwer ; this conccat is very vaine:
for, cannot any of the cauſes, or all of
rence that 13 called into queſtion ? or
cannot thc cauſes be diſpoſed with a
acſktion into two
on comprehends a neccilary truch,
whercin the effe& is argued by the
caules; for the effe&t is no more, but
a comprehen(ion of all che cauſes:
and when the cauſes doe argue the
effc&, the effe is reſolued into the
cauſes ; therefore when we know the
cauſes wecannot but know the etfeR.
And conſequently, fuch propoſiti-
ons are necctlary zand what they are,
ſuch the concluſion muſt be, thac 1s
lawtully inferred trom chem,
If there may b: premiſes, and con-
I
ot theſe precepts: and it may ſeeme |
propolitions? |
| | Without doubt they may. Allo, u is
molt certaine, . that, every propolici- |
no
_——
| The Art of Logicke,
2&5 i
no doubt, there be examples of it, |
and we may (hew them it need were,
bue I will (aue that labour for this
ume, for divers reaſons. 1. Arsſtorde
hath done chat alreadie, Poſter. h1b. 2.
cap.11.10as, hc that will, may make
_ ofthem, 2. This kinde of know-
| Jedge cannot cally be dilcerned, fee-
Ing 118 very hard for vs 10 inderſland
| thoſe principles of @ thing that are true,
| | firſt, and of the [ame kinde: 28 Ariſtorle
| doth admoruſh, Poſter, (16. 1. cap. 9.
Difficile antem &c, 3. By 2 mans
owne practice, and oblcruation, he
ſhall Ende chem, and their vie in na- |
efirall chings: and in chem onely: for |
in matters dxvinc, and ſpirituall, ſuch
mencs can haueno place. Inthem
we vnderſtard by faith, not by lence,
and faith hath Gods authoritie tor the
nciple thereof, nor the nature or
cauſes of the things chemſelucs. I ſay,
| | aman may finde them by pragtice,
| becauſe by ſence we get memory, by the
| remembring the doing of the [ame thing
| oftex, we get experience, by oxr many
joe remembring , Ons experience 4s
one:
—
_—
. The art of Logicke, |
| One's among} all theſe that we dee ro-
member , theys is one thing wherew
mans minde doth veſt ſatisfied eboue
: that which 1 one, and the ſame
| amongit the ref}, becomes a principtums
of ſcience, if1t bolong vnto 4 thang that
&, Thus much we learne from Ar+ |
ftotle, Pofter.11b.2.cap.19. Exſenſn,
BY > The aw-doves of a demonſtration,
| ' | whereby wee know that « thing #9,
| oon(iits m ſome of thee that follow.
I. Of the cauſes, but not the firſt, or if
immediate, 2. Of things mediate, | |
ard no cauſe : but ſach as are veck| |
procated, or mutually referred v0
each other. 3. Of a demonſtration |
that ſhewes what a thing 1s. 4. Of |
things that are not reciprocated, yet |
it #1 better knowne, and yet nacane, |
5 Of a ſuperior (cience 5 4s Geome- |
ery & to the Optichs, and Arithme-
ticks to mw/iche. 6. Of other ſcrencos |
whereof one 15 not plated wnder ano- ;
ther, as Surgery, us unto Geometry ; L ©
To know that a wound is healed 00-| F
ner
RD De CCC—_— ER
, "20
—_—_—
The Art of Logicke.
wer, or lates betengs to the Sargeon: |
but to know the tawſe why it ts bea-
ted ſooncy or lattey, belongs 10 Gev-
Meh). 7. In 4 demonſtration that
| - fbewtth hat thing ts, ſermernpre
alſo the medium 11 placed without
. tbe extreames, as when we ſay, why
doth not the wall breath * Wee a-
ſwer, becanſe it ts not a lvyymng crea-
Inre : and theſe Syllogiſmes are at-
wayes made in the ſecond figure z af-
ter this (ort:whatſorwer doth breath,
} i aliving creature ; Bat a wall is
08 4 biting creature. Therefore 4.
wall doth not breath, Poſter. lib. 8i
| 04Ps 1 3, |
—
OC —
Thus farre goe Ar;fotles precepts,
coſhew vs what Syllogiſmes containe
neceſſary truth z and rhe degrees
thereof, It any expe examples of
| theſe laſt : I anſwer, they may be gi-
ven becauſe we may haye examples
of the former, as I haue alreadie pro- |
ved. They may be given with more |
© eaſe then the former ; becaule the |
- things contained in chem are Deercr |
| eo
237.
-—
— c_—_—_
%. %
%
%
— - 0 OO tC os EE rn
_— ee el a nn RE cdl
| 28
The Art of Logicke,
—
I,
to our vnderſtanding : but I will (ue
that labour,ieaſt I make my diſcourſe
ouer- long, and the Reader too 1dle,
We vle that rule with moſt profit,
which we vndcrſtand and praftice
together,
REY
Cuar HE
Of Syllogiſmes contatning con-*
jecturall truth,
I theformer Chapter, IT haue dif-
patched all the precepts that con-
cerne a Demonſtration. In this, 1
muſt ſet downe thoſe, which teach
vs how to findeourt Syllogiſmes, that
containe probable, and conicurall
truth, Ar:{totles precepts that con-
cerne this kinde of truth, are theſe
vnder-Writen. | |
That «Axiome is probable which
ſeemes (0 to all, to many, or them
Ibat are wiſe, by certaime frequent
notes,and cleerencs. Top tib.1.cap.l.
| Thoſe
vt 2
The Art of Logicke.
Thoſe «Accidents whith agree to the
ſubie# by themſelnes, mrhe man-
ner aforeſayd : but im /ub ſort P
they may be, and not be attributd
therewnto, they ( | (ay ) cannatbe «
medium im 4 Demonſtration ; be-
Canſe they cannot inferre a concluſion
that contames a neceſſary truth. Po
frer. lib. I.Cap.6. | i |
Theſe two. precepts are all that I
can findein Arftotle, touching theſe
Syllogiſmes: and I chinke; they are
full and plane enough, fo as, wee
necde not lecke- tor more, either pre-|
Cepts, or cxamplesto ſer our their na-
ture, and make 'vs vnderſtand chern, |
therefore, they ſhall patle without
further ſearch or explicaton,
From hence wee may inferre thar
thing we ſeeke for on this manner:
If Adjundts or Accidents make a
conjetturall truch, and no more,
ifme conlijting of |
then a Syllog
AdjunAsor Accidents, doch con-
tainc a conje(turall cruch onely.
But wee hauc the firſt from Arifto-
ze, in the places allcdged, for he
IF excludcs |
Ga Ls
—_ ee
Ml
I Te
The art of Logicke,
. excludes Accidents from a De
-monſtracion, and eſteemes them
no more, bur cleere notes,
tore ( according to hum ) S$yllop1il.
| me cenbing bf accidents <a
bur conjeAurall eruch, + +
"To concludethis poine, we ought
not to forget, that ;Ariftocle giues vs
rules of fuch Syllogiſmes, as hee cals
Contemtions, and « Paralogi/me : his
deed was good, becauſe ir doth ſome
waics{cruc to giuevsvnderſtanding,
inthe precepts of Syllogiſmes atore-
ayd: but Iwill omit«the- fayd rules,
becauſe they tend toſhew'vs precepts
by privation or negation onely, Arj-
fotle did well, becauſe from himwe
haue the firſt formall Arcof Logicke.
I muſt omit them, in'av nwch 7 2gall
| chings that mighe cxplicare aprecept,
* | fitte:not'my preſent purpoſe,
| fore here will pura all endcothis
| matter,
cre»
|
' an Axiomeceme probable,here. |
WI 8 ww bai gs FF 35 w3 wW
|
T he Art of Logicke.
C u TSA
Of the firſt kinds of connex.
Syllogiſmes.
pit! haue fupplyed the 0-
verlight of Remug, thereupon
thenarureof Artrequires, that, I &-
ter ypon therules of compound Syl-
| logiline, Remus doth definethem Fil
in this one ſhore lentence.
the whole queſtion makes one part of
bl, and the" of pony wakes
' the other part. wh
Ariſtotle doch' ackijo il oY
pound Spllgiimes, 3$Thauc (hewed
. 43. Bur hee doth noc define
TW at all,(for any than that IHad)
neickar's it greatly beg bo , forthe
' nature £5 2 well gh
hed wee kawenl SY
—F
Va
AS pUlogif me us hnapmdad| 4 |
|
|
f the propoſition, affirmed, and com-|
|
|
B
_ _—
_
|. QUL
. oe.
*;
——_ - ad__ > « a —
I O_o
: : aces. - 17% . . " %
" "The Art of Logicke.
In ſimple Syllogilmes, the argu-
ment, and 'thequeftion made rwo
diſtin& propolitions: in theſe, they
make but one. In them, one thing |
was ſimply attributed to another: |
here the whole queſtion, and
| ment is compouded gocher pehach |
ropertics doe make them really to |
E Fer. in thes miner or kinde 0 dif:
—_ Theſe com pond, oF white
ms arc thus divid
_, Gnas,
f Srlrſne,s CDbnntt,
b 4 Hlegjme, 6« then hen =.
f, hereof W Commexe,
_ it ts of two ſorts. bs
ort $ s
hy ip tl
Aeth the conſe [gents |
Hriſtoele doth call all ne
Solo by che name of Hypetbe-
ticall, becauſe they nferre the conclt-
= vpon the —_ Oftnide!
.
®f x
<a, 3
2 -
——_ - _——
LN
"The Art of Logiche..
| | =
thereef:& doth divide thew ingo _
4s conclude according ynto tr anſumpt
on : and qualitie, ( i928 Pack res
derſtandsit ) when the neincr it take
out of the waiorz 25 1n this example,
If a man, then a living creature. But 4
many therefore a lying creature, Aud |
when ut concludes by foes x more |
of things durioned:; 4s tn t
Je us eber day, wight pears
Therefore it is not night. He brings |
this atlarge. Prier 5b, 1.cap. 23-0 29.
If we vnderſtand Ariforle thus, he
| agrees wholy with Reway, and in all
reaſon welhould fo vnderftand him.
In che laft place alledged, he:doth
promiſe to explicate how many
wayes a Syllogiſme is made Hypo-
rg ab but (25 Pacing truely (ayes)
he pace where he doth ic, is notto |
And Iam of gpinion,thas, |
beds willingly 'negle& it, becauſe
hedoth ſuppole, that, every queſt1on, |
and argument way be framed, and con-
cluded in fimple Syllogiſme : : and chus
himſclte aback - an abs I: cp.
33 FIT YN
_
V 3 The
[>
_-
tollowes according}y zzheone interres,
' The antecedent us aſſumed, when the
' words of it are barely repeated in the
If affiwmatue, or negatiuerhere,then
they are aſhrmatiuve, or negauue
| here.
| che latter part of the pr
| But Godſparednot the naturali brav-
| - In this example, the former part of
Theparcs of the propolſituon, in a |
connexe Syllogiſme are called by the |
naine of antecedent, and conſequent ; |
and chac very fitly : tor-the one goes |
beforegin place,and nature, the other |
and thc other 1s interred,
The Art of Logtcke, |
ſecond propolicion, or alſumpcion,
The conſequent is con:luded, when
tion, 1s
barely repeated in the Concluſion,
We haue exampics of this kinde ve+
ry trequent.
If God (pared wit the natural bran
cher, he will not /pare thee.
CDES,
T herefore be will wet [pare thee.
thic propoſition, 15 barely repeated in
the
®.
” 2-2 ——————_——_
-
the allumprion ; and the latter part,
LE The Art of Logicke, |
in the concluſion. And thus the que-
ſtion, and the third rgument, is al-
| wayes diſpoſed in this inde of Con-
nexe Syllogitines ; ſomeuumes the}
proote of the antecedent 1s allumed,
not the antecedent ut felte: In that
caſe, ut muſt, be reduced vnto-this
forme an example ot chis1s layd ouc
in Moſes wores, Numb. 1.2. 14
If her Father had ſpit in ber fact,
ſhee muſt be ſont ont,
But ſhee #6 leprowms.
T berefore ſhee muſt be [but out, -
This cxample atſumes not the an-
eeceders, but the proofe thereof, ar-
guing the ſame from the greater tO;
the lcile, thus, Her Father did it; be-!
| cauſe God did it, Her face is defiled'.
| with ſpittle:for it is Leprous,}.; '-- + |
|; Thus ſort of Connexe Syllagiſmes,
| may calily bereduced voto:a [impley
for it doth change the mariner of dil-|
| poſing verylyile ; Wee may hae it,
thus $..
v "OE He
7.
OD. AS AG ro wo
a... — A
_ —_—_—
296 The art of Logicke,
Fg | Hethat ſpared 08 the naturall bran-
ches, hath no rea/on to ſpare thee,
But God/pared n6t the naterall bran-
ches.
Therefore he bath no reaſon to ſpare
| 4 hee 6
[ Inche 1 Cor. 15. 12. we haue an
" example of chis kinde of Connexc,
that ſeemes to be ſomewhat more dif-
ficult 3 Where the Apoſtle reaſons
thus:
If Chriſt be riſen, then other men [bai
Eo
Bm ( brift i riſen : ſo 1 bane pre
cbed. and you beleene.
Therefore the bodies of men ſhall riſe.
I ſay, this example is more difficulr |
then the former: tor, the propoſition
hath rwo intire, and diſhn& ſimple |
2X1OTNes IN it: but 11 may be reduced, :
| and brought into this forme,
7 hey that ſay, that Chriſt @ viſen,
' muf? /ay, that men ſpall rye,
_ 2 But |
m—_
—
—_—— — ——
&
þ
|=
"But you beleeue, and ſay, that Chriſt |
The Art of Logicke.
\ berijen: becauſe 1 have preacheav. |
fall riſe. |
And this js wholly agreeableto the |
Apoſtles diſputation: tor he argueth |
againſt chem chat denycd the laſt; |
bur in his judgement they might nor
doe ſo, becaule they did contelTe the
firlt. I hope I haue made this clecre
enough to our vnd: rſtandings:thare-
fore I will patle to the next.
CG4as-LVIEL
Therefore you wu fay al/s, that men |
Of the ſecond kinae of Connexe
Syllogiſmes,
| The ſecond ſort of a comex Syllogiſme
taketh away the conſequent, that it
may take away the antecedent.
TORRE I %
—— = 7 GY
5
T- take away ( in this place) um-|
porecth,
the putting of a Contra |
pn;
———
hb ——————_—_—_ IS
| 298 The Art of Logicke, ©
|
' diction: ſoas, the Contradifory to
the latter part of the propoliaon,
makes the alſumpaon, and the Con-
tradiftory vito che former part ofthe |
propoliaon, makes the Conclulion,
| The Apoſtle Ga/. 3 18, giues vs an |
inſtance of thus precept,
[f the inheritance be of the Law, it is
S j | Bnut it 15 of promiſe. Ds
| | Therefore ut is not of the Law.
—
Th | T he aſſumption in this argument, q
's; | is Contradiftory, to the latter part of I}
| che propoſition, That ſayth, the swhe-
Fiance is not of promiſe. Theallump-
| cron ſayth,che inheritante i« of pronnſe.
[nthelike ſort,che Concluſion 1s con-
tradiory corhe firſt part of the pro-
polition, The one ſaych, ebe inberi- | |
taxce is of the Law. Theother ſayth, |
theinheritance i not of the Law. This |
kinde, is ealily ( alſo) brought intoa |
ſimple, thus; |
Whatſeever us by the Law, is not of |
promiſe. - | 9J3GY 5 |
| (3-4 | Bus)
-——_ -
k mm—_
.
The Art of Logicke,
But the inheritance ts of promiſe, ©
Therefore the inheritaxce i not of the
Law. |
This kinde of Conn: xe hath but
threerermes 1n it, Viz. 1. [nheritance.
2. Promiſe, 3. Law. And the firlt is
repeated, or rwiſc ſubic &ed 1n the
propeſi
1s calily curned from compound to
limple. wah
We haue an example Gal. 2. 21.
that is nor. ſo ealily conuerred,
If laftice be by the Law, Chrift is
dead uy VANE:
But Chrift ts not dead in yaine;
——
Ition, wherevpon this kinde |
| Therefore [nflice i not by the Law.
it may be made into a ſimple forme 3
_ _ LY =
I hauepro ounded this Syllogiſine ,
(ap. 44-and hane there ſhewed, h6w
therefore it is needletle to repeare it
here, The truth contained 11 thee -
Syllogiſmes, jsto be judged ofz2ecor- :
ro the precepts: of' a cotincxe
axome:; if we take them as they are
Fold — Conneg.
——— CC —_—_ ,
|
CES —
| 300 ' The Art of Logicke. Or .
| Connex, But if wetake them as ſim-| . !
pleſyllogiſmes,then their cruch muſt |
( be judged of, according to the pre-
cepts of a (imple ſyllogiſme, There-
fore wehaue ſayd cnough couching
their naturall ſe.
LELAN TEC WCET):
Cuavwe, L VFILT, |
_ Of the firſt kinde of a Diſ-
Juni? Syllogiſme, l
Raemns, | A compound Syllogiſme us then dif
suntt, when the propoſition thereof |
is 4 drrinntt axione.
There are two ſorts : The faſt doth
take away the one, and couclude the
other,
FT. B;. taking away, and concluding, 18
here vnderſtood Contradiating
and repeating, in the ſame fort as I
hauc ſhewed,cap.56.& 5 7. eAviſtotle
calls theſe Hypotheticall z and fo he
$ | well may: tor the principall foundati-
| | | onof chem, 15a ſuppoſition: for one |
=: ; — : —- 1 'v
Z GCC COOTOTTTR
Om —
—— | _
i.
Fo
one termezbut one part of the oppo-
lion: for, we muſt remember, thar,
no arguments but oppoſites come in-
| tothe Syllogiſmes of this kindeznow.
| oppolites are ſometimes one, againſt
one, and ſome other times many a-
gainſt one: fo as, thoſe many make
one part, and the other one, makes
| the ocher part: chercfore, it 15 truely
fayd, one is taken away, when all
thoſe are contradicted that make one |
part of the oppoſition ; and one 1s af-
ſumed, when thoſe many are barely |
repeated. Againe, that word one, 1s
not ynderſtood indifterencly of either
part of the oppolition : tor then, the
cotradifting of any one (ingle terme,
muſt inferrcthe concluding of all 0-
thers that oppoſe that one : but that
may not be ; for onely one ofchem at
once, can agree to the ſame ſubic,
m the ſame reſpett, part, and time.
Theretore it is vaderſtood of all the
| The Art of Logicke. Be 30T
ching is taken for granted, and that |
muſt begranted,or elſe they can con-
clude nothing,
By the word [ oxe} is meant, not -
——_—.
—_
Mo
lingle | _
I eee EL LIL I ES ISS
ae er es ERS
_—_—_——
—_— at
The Art of Logicke, |
lingle termes that are ditoyned, cx-
cept one: becaule from thence, chat |
one that 1s not Contradited, may
well þe Concluded : but where one
lingleterme is oppoſed vato another
* lingle rerme, there che Contradiftin
ot cither of them indifferently, doth
mterre the Concluding of the 0-
ther.
*: By chis precept the propolition may
be negative in {ome part, and there-
fore choſe arguments that are opp0o-
ſed as Contradifories, haue placein
| this kinde of arguing, I will bring in- |
ſtances of all ſorts ro make theſe chings | |
plane,
—
I. Tow muſt ſay, be us or be us not.
- But you may 101 ſay, he is not.
6: ' Therefore you muſt ſay be 8.
The ſecondterme oppoſedinthe |
Ef propoſition is negariue, and that 1s
| | Contradied in the allumpnon : the
AY | | firſtcerme inche propoſition 1s athir-
s { mariue, andthar is concluded: or re-
| peated 10 the Concluſion,
wel
©y RF
Q , -
=
# of
p—
"4.
pM
— Oo - ——_
\
(|
| The Art of Logicke, 393. ]
We haue another inſtance of this, | 4. |
2542. 24-13,
[ muſt ſuftamegeuther ſeven yeares fa-
mine, or three moneths purſue, or |
three dayes peſtulence | |
But I will not (uſtame, ſeven yeares |
| famine nor three moneths pur ſuite, |
Therefore | will ſuftame three dayes | 3:
peſtrlence, |
T his argument doth preſume, that
David muſt vndergoe one ot thelc
| three, and no more, bur that one, |
If that be granted, it doch interrethe
Concluſion necclarily. 1f that be de-
nycd, it hath no force to Conclude.
In the aiſumprion, two branches of
the disjunEnon ( comprehended in |
the propoſition ) arc Contradifted: |
| The churd branch ( vntouched in the
atlumption ) is barcly repeated in che
Concluſion, We may brig this ar-
gument into a ſimple Syllogi\me, in
this ſort,
—- <—Aei__ -
He that ma eſcape the famine, and
ſword,
Cee. Mo
MY «
_Y
The Art of Logicke. - NE 6
| ſword, muſt induye the peſtilenci,
| But Davidhath bbertie to eſcape the
| fame and ſword.
Therefore Dawid muſt indare the pe-
6
T he propolttion preſumes, that one
of the three muſt v indured,and no
more but one of them, It that be
granted,the whole argument is good, | þ
if that bedenyed, it hath no force to ?
proue; |
5 I will adde one example mexe,that |
.| I may make this precept clecreto the
vetermoſk, |
1 1 Sorrates, u either weſt, or uninſt. |
| 4 But he us not inft- ;
Therefore be i nbaſt,
Hereis ſuppoſed, that every man
hath one of theſe two, and but one of
theſe: and thereupon, itinferres the
& | . | concluſion necc{[arily:otherwile nor. |
" | Wherein it agrces with the two for- L
x mer It hathwo ſingletermes onely, =
ſed each to other g and it1s an-
oppo : different
————_ 7
( The Art of Logicke.
{different whether of them two had
on,andconcluded,or barelyrepeared
in the Concluſion; for the forme of
differ from ahem forme, If we de»
2 | (ireto ſce itmade alimple ſyllogiſme,
= | we =" 7 Wit goa _
He that is not inſt, it wiinſt.”
Socrates i not inſt.
Therefore be @ vninft. ** - m—
x | This precept is now made plhines:
be = TT ecd'o the fe- |
ſortof a __ ae Splgiie,
| Cnay,
? LIX.
* |. Of the ſecond kinde of Di/- -*
jun? Syllogsſmes,
A dirpmt Sy pegime of of che Jacend
ſort,is, when the propeſition i; affir-
- matine in all the parts : one 61 aſſ*-
med in theaſumcin, and ry
becne Contr adiedin the afſumpri- |
Syllogilme, andforceof truth, 1s the |
ſame m both : and this doth make it | -
35: |
R 11:45,
SW Op. WY
| | 306 |
—_—
—_——
The Art of Logicke,
| I.
Pos
\
CO ————— —
| taken awajinthe C onchaſiow.
B Y aſſawing, is vnderitood a bare |
repearing, and taking away, 1s 2
contradiAing:in the ſame ſort aShath
bcene betore (et downe,
In this ſecond kinde of diſjun& |
Syllogitme: there are three proper- |
ties, Furlt, 7 be propo/ſirion ts whoty af-
fe watiue, Secondly, One ſingle terme
onely of the eppoſitzon, 1 repeated mm the
a{[amption, Thurdly, T he other part ©
contraditied in the conclaſion. thertore
this forme doch really dirfer from the |
former, That concludesafhrmaniues,
and no negatives: this concludes ne-
gariucs, and no afthrmatiues, Gel.
Cap: 3. ver: 2.3.doth yecldvs an ar-
gument of his kinde,
Tee received the ſpirit, eithey by the
Law, or the Goſpell.
But jee received ut by the Goſpell,
Therefore yee recerved u not by the
Law
This diſputation doth ſuppoſe two
things:
——— —
he art of Lrgicke,
things: firlt, They had the ſpirit, Se-
condly, one ofthcſerwo, the law, or
the Goſpell gaue'nc them ( not both
together, ) Thoſe cwo things being
granced, the argumcnt cannot be de- |
nycd,It exther ot them might be deni-
ed, the argument may not be gran-
ted. Theailumption doth barcly re-
peatethe {econdterme oppoſed: and
the concluſion doth contradiat the
firſt, I will adde thus ſecond inſtance,
Thu «tion, is either ſupernaturally
gooa, or [upernaturally evil, or na-
thrally good, or naturally eunll,
But it is ſupernataraly good.
Therefore ut 15, neither ſupernatarally
evnll, nor naturally goody ner natu-
rally evill, |
Here we finde firſt, divers termes |
oppoſed 1n che propolition, one a- |
ganſt many ; and many againſt one, |
| Secondly; They are all athrmanue.'
Thirdly; The firſt rerme is barely re-
' peared 1n theallumption, Fourthly;
Theother three, are contradited 1n |
X 2 che
| 308
_m__—_
The Art of Lioicke, |
, the concluſion; Fittly, A ſuppoſition |
that every ation hath one of theſe |
propertics, ard no more but one of
them, |
The reaion why one oppolite
terme onely, isatſumed; andthe reſt ;
contradicted, 15; becauſe but one oPp-
polite, can bein the. ſubje& at once,
and the preſence of thar,doth inforce
the abſence of the ret.
We mayprng thele into ſimple
Syliog1mes; after thus {ort,
That aft which is ſupernaturally goed,
e: not [npernaturally evill;nor natu-
rally good, nor natarally evill,
But this att i ſupernaturaily good.
Therefore «, neither ſupernatwurally
evill, nor naturally good, nor nata- |
rally eaill.
I doubt not, but this will ſuffice to
ſhew the cruth,and vle of this precept.
It is needles for me to fer forth what
ruth 1s contained in theſe Syllo-
giſmesz for if we take them as dif-
junRiue, then they containe uuth no
_other-
P i _— ene.
| Theart of Logicke,
otherwiſe then as disiunAtiue axioms
doe, If wetake them as ſimple, then
they muſt be referred vnto (imple
Syllogiſmes:therefore inthe p
of them, we ſhall know what cruth
is contained in theſe. I mighrallo al.
ledge the reaſon why Remwns doch
preſecure all the precepts of Com»
pound Syllogifmes : and thereby ju-
ftotle did but namethem, & not
ſecute themz and ſo juſtihie him alſo
but ( Ichinke)) I haue donethar ſut-
ficiently in the matter of Compound
Axtomes, Cap. 42+ they, and theſe,
draw in one,and che {ame line: there-
| fore I referre the Reader vnto that
place, Repettions are but loſt ha-
bour,
Now we are come to an endofall
the precepts of Logicke :ſo as,there is
no more.required, to make a Logict-
| an, then what hath beene ſayd alrea-
die, But that ſeemes not enough to
Ram, for he brings another mem-
ber of this art, and calls it Afecuhodes
divers
—
thfic him. And for what cauſe Ar |
' | bur Tomitthe ſame of purpole for |
Jo
_—_— —
F go
" The Art of Logicke,
ceptsdo teach it, then we haue done
enough alrcadie, and can doe no.
more, except wee will repeat the
ſame things againe, 3. If we define,
and diftribute according to the pre-
ceptsof a definition anddiſtribution,
Cap. 34. &c. We cannot placedeh-
divers reaſons. 1, No precepts of Lo- |
gicke can teach 1t, becauſe even ( ac-
cording to hum) Method i no more,
but the orderly placing of ſentences to-
gether, Buc the precepts of Logicks
cannot teach that, it being no more,
bur the generall nature ot arr, as wee
hauealreadicfound Cap. r. (I fay of
art (1mply, abſtraed from all parti
culars, and not applycd to Rhecorich,
Logicke, or any otherzas we do when
welay Rhetoricke is an art, &c.) 2. If
any preceptsof Locke, hauc power
to =_ the wh framing « ſen-
rences together, then they mult be,
exther ſome chat are paſt,or ſomethat
ae yet tocome: if we muſt haue re-
courſe totheſe, then their Authors,
and places muſt be. named. But that
5 impollible, Tt che precedent pre-
mitions,
a. A _—_ —_—_
*
4 LIP. NN ee
—
The Art of Lopicke, Ts; z1f* *
nitions, and diſtributions, nor any 0»
ther ſentences thatdepend vpothem,
vnduly and out of order;tor then the
moſt generall will come firſt, and the
' molt ipeciall will come laſt : and chis
'1S all che Method Raww req
wred,
4. He alledges Ariſtotles authoricie
| for method z butaltogether without þ
| cauſe , for he alledgeth no place, nor
; Words, and I am ſure he cannor. A-
r:ſtotle calls all the precepts of Logicke
a Mcthod , whereby wee come to
know, how to diſcutle. Top. 46, 1+
Method, one member of his Art,
diſtin& from the reſt : ſceing
therefore we haue nothing
ro ſay touching Method,
I muſt here put an
end co the whole
Worke,
—_—
EI NT S*
Cap. 2. 4b 8.cap.12.prior.lsb.1.cap.;1. |
therfore he did neuer meane ro make |
\
.
- PF ,
a.v** «th.
wo
7; :
Co Benn 0
* « 4 Py
TS
tym
vm cane en dS TT
» a . >,
4 7D w, —_—_—— _— | , |
y_ F(AMUE « ThFiw) ime cv 1 |
Lv ans Yoconk Weg ynanam f
[
aubrane 3
orea
corputy
_(or a 7
ub To ! ec BY
641hyumil C eG wu "
c6111/ g21huntv .*
41 a7 ol
FR
fa
A1Rak
Rs Fg J4F} it 5
of Pu , on1:Þ 1”
e101. era SU Merna 111 TOY | h
Hearea nn fe . cor per!
TIIEW 2» HI ICUTA FDIC Sens}
h Ste. vunt OMIHCS 11 om
e rationale {kkrda 10 11
ke@, 3
.
s 7
2. l .
- — » "nm,
_ K
Ks bid
4 ths erty
* BREE ©
8 5 Sr
= Y Bag
w—_ I,
«f
ws > Y 18; S
Wy f + a qi an "ou Y%+ m_-
nktonke 8
«ic orb!
_(orſe (15
orea
"ns
th exbit Onmple
compontarnl: Symp Enbum
In [x ata
£41 ann
coin / Pigs _
111AÞ1111
m1 1atunnaydes
F wanlyo. of
Sernte |
$AE /
gut
Quo Wks
Hem,
hom
\iseisite
—_
ue ons
Fauhe0t
Es. -;h Sene F5Lan ha
my :
ens), Stn 0 we $ WM
C opihc 01417 feos ok 114 MLL
1 cra mula Wer 11770 Fed
Har ca ATR Te con1po#!
y ELSE ra 1010 10 YC/1S!
12h yunt CVTHCED 1 118
Fatienale tkhwa TUT7G :
nc, $&
662d"
SW, -
-
x
4
3” **
SD A230. -
>» Ga. ts "LK"
Live Music
Archive
Librivox
Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland
Museum of Art
Internet
Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American
Libraries
TV News
Understanding
9/11